DOCSLIB.ORG

Susitna River Crossing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Susitna River Crossing Management Uni4 t Susitna River Crossing L The dramatic Susitna River1 crossing is a prime recrea- General Description tion area, but the site 's low visual absorption capa- bility demands sensitive development to retain the Management Unit 4 begins 5 1/2 miles northeast high scenic value. of the Susitna River crossing and extends acros e rive th o sapproximatelt r 3 miley s southeas e crossingth f o t . a highlThi s i s y scenic area e anticipatio,th fulf o l f o n The historically and culturally interesting crossing the "Big Su." The road parallels the townsit d min an eDenalf o e e visiblar i e across Susitna River along its west bank until it the Susitna River from within this management L turns sharply easo crost e tone-lane th s , unit. However, due to its distance from the canted bridge over the Susitna. (It is the highway, it is difficult to decipher any de- longest e Denalbridgth n io e Road)e Th . tail in the view without binoculars. The traveler's view e stronglar s y oriented toward Denali Townsite access road intersects with the river, with opportunities to experience the Denali Wild and Scenic Road just east of the Susitna from many varying point f viewo s . the river crossing. The alignment of the road also gives the traveler a sense of anticipation in the east- Other land use and development activities bound direction as there is a dramatic change within this management unit are located on to a mountain landscape along the southern both sides of the river and include recrea- D54 e Clearwateth edg f o e r Mountains. tional homesites, lodges, gravel extraction L 4 Susitna River Crossing Assessment Units D23 — D27 T-1 NORTH 1 0 2 mi. •T-L KEY ^Real-1 -p.Turnout fa. Impact Mitigation Riga 1Propose- d Realignment Rec"1 Kec. -Recreation - Real -1 2iHi. .Greenbelt State Owned Land 1 LJ Federal Land Private Land D55 sites and an airfield. However, no permanent Impact Mitigation: To take appropriate action to mitigate adverse visual impacts resulting structure e visiblar s e froe Susitnth m a River from previous roadside maintenanc d developean - crossing. At present, there are few ment . established recreational facilities neae th r Susitna River crossing. Management Land Ownership& Recommendations Management Responsibility DevelopmenLan& e dUs t (LU)______ Land management within this uni s predomii t - nantly the responsibility of the BLM. There Currently d developmenan e lane th ,us d t activ- are .several (5) private landholdings scattered ities within this unit consiso lodgestw f o ta , along the road, however, all of the land small boat launch site, several recreational immediately e adjacenSusitnth o t at River homesites, material sites and an airfield. It crossin s managei g y BLMb de southwesTh . t appears thae existinth t g private lands have e crossinth ban f o s M k beet asidha gBL se ny b e been developed and any future developcent would as a recreation withdrawal. The DOTPF main- e discretioth e BLMt bth a e ,f o whicn h cur- 0 footain30 ta s right-of-way throughout this rently manage e remainde th e sroadsid th f o r e management unit. lands n planninI e f futurthes.o th e r eus efo g s landsrecommendei t i , d that developmenf o t the scenic and recreational resources be addressed as the highest priority. Other Visual Resource developments such as mining, homesites, com- Management Objectives mercial establishment d materiaan s l extraction shoul e discourageb d d unless they - retaien r o n hance these resource values. e managemenTh t recommendations presenter fo d this unit focus on the themes of retention, en- The overall recommendations for the Denali Wild hancement and impact mitigation. and Scenic Road outline some general consider- ation r sensitivfo s developmentd ean lane us d . Retentio o retaiT n; n those characteristics The following points describe how these manage- which contribute to the particularly high ment actions should be applied to the Susitna scenic resource values and interesting driving River crossing area: experience within this management unit. Enhancement o enhancT : e traveler'th e s under- • Recreational developmen overd t an -(boty da h standing, appreciation and use of this area night use) should be encouraged near the through the development of appropriately sited Susitna River crossin e mosth t s a gappropriat e D56 and designed roadside recreational facilities. land use within this unit. L e lanTh d • adjacenSusitne th o t at River cross- d thaan t g in visible e frorecreationath m l sites shoul e retaineb d r publifo d c recrea- tiona e onlyus l . [ Furthe• r commercia d homesitan l e develop- ment should not be located within view from the Susitna River crossin d shoulan g d respond to the greenbelt recommendations for this unit. i exceptioWite • th h recreationaf o n l homes!tes, federal land disposals shoul e discourageb d d in this unit. L •v -.»,-;.** -^ Al• l minin materiad an g l extraction activities should be restricted from locating within view r from the road. .....,, Recreation Development (Rcc) The Susitna River crossing is a major recre- ation focus along the Denali Wild and Scenic With proper site design and landscaping, this unsight- Road. However w visualo a l, s currenha e us t ly gravel pit is the recommended location for camp- e onlth ye are impacd th existinan a n o t g pub- ground and rest area development (Rec - 1). While it lic recreational facility is a small boat is removed fromriverthe bank, siteeasythe has ac- launch ramp on the northeast bank of the riv- cess and good screening potential. s BLwithdrawer ha M e southwesth n t banf o k the crossin r recreationafo g o ln uset bu , developmen t takeye ns ha placet . In order to respond to the existing and future demand for recreational use at the Susitna • The east banks of the crossing have moderate L River crossing, there may need to be several visual absorption capabilities. facilities developed within close proximito t y • The existing boat launch site is well-sited, the river which provide camping sites, scenic but too small and has no off-road pull-out viewpoints, picnic sites, boat launches, river space. acces d hikinan s g trailse followinTh . g • There are no established picnic, camping or development opportunities and constraints toilet facilities near the crossing. have been identified: • Therlargea s i e , former material site approx- imatel 2 mil . ye Denal e riveeth th east a if ro t wese Th Susitnte • th bank f ao s River crossing Townsite road junction s developmenha t I . - po t L have very low visual absorption capabilities. tential as a campsite and day use facility. D57 There Ia snarro w ridgeto pe eas th drivt n o e Pos• t information indicatin locatioe th g f o n side of the Denali Road which leads to a the ridgetop viewpoin e sout th s wel a ho t tl breathtaking viewpoint over the Susitna River. as recreation-related informatioe th r fo n It is unsaf r intensivfo e e o usn e s sincha t i e Susitna River (I.e. fishing, boating, etc.). vehicle turnaround spacd onlan ey limited opportunities for sensitive expansion. A recreation developmen e Susitntth plar afo n Rec-2 Ridgetop Viewpoint: This short drive alone th g River crossing should be prepared, taking top of a very narrow ridge leads to spectacular advantage of the site's outstanding amenities e Susitnth view f o sa River. This viewpoint should be developed In conjunction with the while minimizing facility development. Recre- Rest Area (Rec-l o provid)t e travelers witn a h ational development shoul e restricteb d e th o t d Interpretive site for the Upper Susitna River eas e triver th sid f o ,e wher e visuath e- ab l landscape. Since this s sitextremelha e y limited space for development, rest area facil- sorption capability is highest and existing ities shoul e provideb e drecommende th t a d d landscape alterations are concentrated. rest area site approximatele th 2 mil o 1/ yt e northwest e followinTh . g site development guidelines shoul e appliedb d : Rec-l Rest AreCampgroundd aan e formeTh ; r materials • Prohibit vehicle access on the ridgetop road. site on the east side of the river crossing Provide a small gravel turnout (2-3 cars) at shoul e developeb d a combine s a d d rest ared an a the roadsid d maintaian e nfooa te traith o t l campground. This existing disturbed area now viewpoint. appears to be Sbed as a parking area by recreationlsts at the Susitna River. Site Provid• e interpretive information regarding development and reclamation should include the the Susitna River landscap d wildlifan e t a e following actions: the parking area, leaving the trail unde- velope o experienct d e fulth el e effecth f o t • Construc a vegetatet roadside d th bert a em spectacular panorama. to provide partial screening from traffic. • Regrade the site and establish masses of vegetation withi e sitth ne accordina o t g Rec-3 Boat Launch existine Th : g boat launch site may landscape design scheme. This will provide need to be expanded to provide adequate space some privacy e site' d breath . an p su k expan- to safely back off the boat ramp without siveness. enterin e road f necessaryth gI .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nos Cook Inlet Operational Forecast System: Model Development and Hindcast Skill Assessment
    NOAA Technical Report NOS CS 40 NOS COOK INLET OPERATIONAL FORECAST SYSTEM: MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND HINDCAST SKILL ASSESSMENT Silver Spring, Maryland September 2020 noaa National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Ocean Service Coast Survey Development Laboratory Office of Coast Survey National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce The Office of Coast Survey (OCS) is the Nation’s only official chartmaker. As the oldest United States scientific organization, dating from 1807, this office has a long history. Today it promotes safe navigation by managing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) nautical chart and oceanographic data collection and information programs. There are four components of OCS: The Coast Survey Development Laboratory develops new and efficient techniques to accomplish Coast Survey missions and to produce new and improved products and services for the maritime community and other coastal users. The Marine Chart Division acquires marine navigational data to construct and maintain nautical charts, Coast Pilots, and related marine products for the United States. The Hydrographic Surveys Division directs programs for ship and shore-based hydrographic survey units and conducts general hydrographic survey operations. The Navigational Services Division is the focal point for Coast Survey customer service activities, concentrating predominately on charting issues, fast-response hydrographic surveys, and Coast Pilot
    [Show full text]
  • Little Susitna River FY 2014 Final Report
    Clean Boating on the Little Susitna River FY 2014 Final Report Prepared for: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Alaska Clean Water Action Grant #14-03 July 1, 2013—June 30, 2014 Cook Inletkeeper is a community-based nonprofit organization that combines advocacy, outreach, and science toward its mission to protect Alaska’s Cook Inlet watershed and the life it sustains. Report prepared by: Rachel Lord Outreach & Monitoring Coordinator Cook Inletkeeper 3734 Ben Walters Ln. Suite 201 Clean Boating on Big Lake Homer, AK 99603 (907) 235-4068 FY14 Final Report www. inletkeeper.org 2 Cook Inletkeeper ● www.inletkeeper.org TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 4 Launch Host Program 7 Boater Survey Results 9 Community Outreach 12 Future Work 15 Acknowledgements 16 Appendix A. FY14 Little Su Clean Boater Surveys Appendix B. Media Excerpts Appendix C. Clean boating resources Protecting Alaska’s Cook Inlet watershed and the life it sustains since 1995. 3 INTRODUCTION The Little Susitna River is located in the densely as impacts from high turbidity levels around the populated Southcentral region of Alaska. It sup- Public Use Facility (PUF, river mile 25). This pol- ports salmon and trout populations, making it a lutant loading is associated with busy, high use popular fishing destination for many in the An- times of the summer when Chinook salmon (May chorage and Mat-Su Borough area. In addition to -June) and Coho salmon (July –September) are fishing, people come to the ‘Little Su’ during running in the river. More information on the summer months for recreational boating, hunt- ADEC efforts at the Little Su can be found ing, picnics and camping.
    [Show full text]
  • The Little Susitna River— an Ecological Assessment
    The Little Susitna River— An Ecological Assessment Jeffrey C. Davis and Gay A. Davis P.O. Box 923 Talkeetna, Alaska (907) 733.5432. www.arrialaska.org July 2007 Acknowledgements This project was completed with support from the State of Alaska, Alaska Clean Water Action Plan program, ACWA 07-11. Laura Eldred, the DEC Project Manger provided support through comments and suggestion on the project sampling plan, QAPP and final report. Nick Ettema from Grand Valley State University assisted in data collection. ARRI—Little Susitna River July 2007 Table of Contents Summary............................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 3 Methods............................................................................................................................... 4 Sampling Locations ........................................................................................................ 4 Results................................................................................................................................. 6 Riparian Development .................................................................................................... 6 Index of Bank Stability ................................................................................................... 7 Chemical Characteristics and Turbidity.........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Floods of October 1986 in Southcentral Alaska
    FLOODS OF OCTOBER 1986 IN SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA " » U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OPEN- FILE REPORT 87-391 REVISED 1988 Prepared in cooperation with the: ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES ALASKA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY SERVICES FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION FLOODS OF OCTOBER 1986 IN SOUTHCENTRAL ALASKA by Robert D. Lamke and Bruce P. Bigelow U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 87-391 REVISED 1988 Prepared in cooperation with the: ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES ALASKA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY SERVICES FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Anchorage, Alaska 1988 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section Water Resources Division Federal Center 4230 University Drive, Suite 201 Box 25425 Anchorage, Alaska 99508-4664 Denver, Colorado 80225 11 CONTENTS Page Abstract .............................................................. 1 Introduction .......................................................... 1 Purpose and scope ................................................ 1 Acknowledgements ................................................. 3 Precipitation ......................................................... 3 Discharge data ........................................................ 7 Peak stage and discharge table ................................... 7 Discharge data for October
    [Show full text]
  • Talkeetna Airport, Phase II
    Talkeetna Airport, Phase II Hydrologic/ Hydraulic Assessment Incomplete Draft January 2003 Prepared For: Prepared By: URS Corporation 301 W. Northern Lights 3504 Industrial Ave., Suite 125 Blvd., Suite 601 Fairbanks, AK 99701 CH2M Hill Anchorage, AK 99503 (907) 374-0303 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 2.0 Background Data .................................................................................................................4 2.1 Airport Construction ................................................................................................4 2.2 Past Floodplain Delineations ...................................................................................6 2.3 Past Suggestions for Floodplain Mitigation.............................................................7 2.4 Historical Floods......................................................................................................8 3.0 Flood-Peak Frequency .......................................................................................................12 3.1 Talkeetna River at its Mouth..................................................................................12 3.2 Susitna River Above and Below the Talkeetna River ...........................................13 3.3 Summary................................................................................................................15 4.0 Flood Timing ....................................................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • A Comprehensive Inventory of Impaired Anadromous Fish Habitats in the Matanuska-Susitna Basin, with Recommendations for Restoration, 2013 Prepared By
    A Comprehensive Inventory of Impaired Anadromous Fish Habitats in the Matanuska-Susitna Basin, with Recommendations for Restoration, 2013 Prepared by ADF&G Habitat Research and Restoration Staff – October 2013 Primary contact: Dean W. Hughes (907) 267-2207 Abstract This document was written to identify the factors or activities that are likely to negatively impact the production of salmonids in the Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) basin and to offer mitigation measures to lessen those impacts. Potential impacts can be characterized in two different catagories; natural and anthropogenic. Natural threats to salmon habitat in the Mat-Su basin include natural loss or alteration of wetland and riparian habitats, alteration of water quality and quantity, and beaver dams blocking fish migration. Anthropogenic impacts include urbanization that increases loss or alteration of wetlands and riparian habitats and decreases water quantity and quality; culverts that block or impair fish passage; ATV impacts to spawning habitats, stream channels, wetlands and riparian habitats; “coffee can” introduction of pike in salmon waters; and, beaver dams at or in culverts. What resulted is an amalgamation of existing research and expertise delivered in a brief narrative describing those limiting factors and activities, as well as an appendix listing possible studies to better understand those impacts and potential projects to limit or repair damage to important salmon habitats (Appendix A). Introduction The Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) Basin is drained primarily by two major rivers, the Matanuska and Susitna. The Susitna River watershed encompasses 19,300 square miles, flowing over 300 miles from the Susitna Glacier in the Alaska Range, through the Talkeetna Mountains, to upper Cook Inlet.
    [Show full text]
  • Temporal and Spatial Distributions of Kenai River and Susitna River Sockeye Salmon and Coho Salmon in Upper Cook Inlet: Implications for Management
    Fishery Data Series No. 17-02 Temporal and Spatial Distributions of Kenai River and Susitna River Sockeye Salmon and Coho Salmon in Upper Cook Inlet: Implications for Management by T. Mark Willette and Aaron Dupuis February 2017 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries 1 Symbols and Abbreviations The following symbols and abbreviations, and others approved for the Système International d'Unités (SI), are used without definition in the following reports by the Divisions of Sport Fish and of Commercial Fisheries: Fishery Manuscripts, Fishery Data Series Reports, Fishery Management Reports, and Special Publications. All others, including deviations from definitions listed below, are noted in the text at first mention, as well as in the titles or footnotes of tables, and in figure or figure captions. Weights and measures (metric) General Mathematics, statistics centimeter cm Alaska Administrative all standard mathematical deciliter dL Code AAC signs, symbols and gram g all commonly accepted abbreviations hectare ha abbreviations e.g., Mr., Mrs., alternate hypothesis HA kilogram kg AM, PM, etc. base of natural logarithm e kilometer km all commonly accepted catch per unit effort CPUE liter L professional titles e.g., Dr., Ph.D., coefficient of variation CV meter m R.N., etc. common test statistics (F, t, χ2, etc.) milliliter mL at @ confidence interval CI millimeter mm compass directions: correlation coefficient east E (multiple) R Weights and measures (English) north N correlation coefficient cubic feet per second ft3/s south S (simple) r foot ft west W covariance cov gallon gal copyright degree (angular ) ° inch in corporate suffixes: degrees of freedom df mile mi Company Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Matanuska Susitna Borough LRTP Alaska
    Memo To: Denali National Park Long Range Transportation Plan Team From: ATKINS Email: [email protected] Phone: 720-841-2956 Date: Sep 19, 2014 Ref: cc: Subject: Foreseeable Projects/Plans near Denali National Park Matanuska Susitna Borough LRTP Source: http://www.matsugov.us/plans/lrtp Project details still being researched Alaska Stand Alone Pipeline (ASAP) Source: http://www.asapeis.com/ The Alaska Stand Alone Pipeline (ASAP) Project is a 727-mile long, 36-inch-diameter natural gas transmission mainline extending from the GCF near Prudhoe Bay south to a connection with the existing ENSTAR pipeline system in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. A 29-mile-long, 12-inch- diameter lateral pipeline will connect the mainline to Fairbanks. The proposed pipeline will be buried except at possible fault crossings, elevated bridge stream crossings, pigging facilities, and block valve locations. The pipeline will bypass Denali National Park and Preserve to the east and will then generally parallel the Parks Highway corridor to Willow, continuing south to its connection into ENSTAR's distribution system at MP 39 of the Beluga Pipeline southwest of Big Lake. The Alaska District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has been designated the lead federal agency and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), and the Alaska Department of Natural Resources State Pipeline Coordinator's Office (SPCO) are participating as cooperating agencies in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) development process.
    [Show full text]
  • The Little Susitna River— an Ecological Assessment
    The Little Susitna River— An Ecological Assessment Jeffrey C. Davis and Gay A. Davis P.O. Box 923 Talkeetna, Alaska (907) 733.5432. www.arrialaska.org July 2007 Acknowledgements This project was completed with support from the State of Alaska, Alaska Clean Water Action Plan program, ACWA 07-11. Laura Eldred, the DEC Project Manger provided support through comments and suggestion on the project sampling plan, QAPP and final report. Nick Ettema from Grand Valley State University assisted in data collection. ARRI—Little Susitna River July 2007 Table of Contents Summary............................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 3 Methods............................................................................................................................... 4 Sampling Locations ........................................................................................................ 4 Results................................................................................................................................. 6 Riparian Development .................................................................................................... 6 Index of Bank Stability ................................................................................................... 7 Chemical Characteristics and Turbidity.........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Physical–Biological Interactions in a Subarctic Estuary: How Do
    MARSYS-02290; No of Pages 10 Journal of Marine Systems xxx (2012) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Marine Systems journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmarsys Physical–biological interactions in a subarctic estuary: How do environmental and physical factors impact the movement and survival of beluga whales in Cook Inlet, Alaska? Tal Ezer a,⁎, Julian R. Ashford b, Cynthia M. Jones b, Barbara A. Mahoney c, Roderick C. Hobbs d a Center for Coastal Physical Oceanography, Old Dominion University, 4111 Monarch Way, Norfolk, VA 23508, USA b Center for Quantitative Fisheries Ecology, Old Dominion University, 800 West 46th St., Norfolk, VA 23508, USA c NOAA Fisheries, Alaska Region, 222 West 7th Ave., Anchorage, AK 99513, USA d NOAA Fisheries, National Marine Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way N.E., Seattle, WA 98115, USA article info abstract Article history: The annual abundance population estimates of the endangered beluga whales in Cook Inlet (CI), Alaska, have Received 10 July 2012 indicated a decline in the population over the past decades and no convincing explanation has been offered Received in revised form 10 October 2012 so far for this trend. Satellite tracking data of about 20 Cook Inlet beluga whales (CIBW) over some 5-year pe- Accepted 11 October 2012 riod, as well as annual population counts and stranding reports were compared with environmental observa- Available online xxxx tions. The seasonal movements of the belugas within CI appear to be affected by variations in water temperature, ice coverage and most significantly, by river discharge.
    [Show full text]
  • Susitna River Drainage 18
    SUSITNA RIVER DRAINAGE 18 West Fork Chulitna River Middle Fork East Fork Miles See the Northern 0 20 40 Honolulu Creek Alaska Sport Fish Regulation Summary Unit 3 Chulitna River Byers Creek Unit 6 R i v e r Gilbert Creek Rainbow Trout Special Devils Canyon Managment Waters Clarence Alaska Railroad Lake Troublesome Ck. Trapper PrairieCreek Peters Creek Creek Talkeetna River Clear (Chunilna)Fish Creek Ck. Larson Creek See the Northern Birch Creek Nowhere Talkeetna Unit 5 Alaska Sport Fish Sunshine Creek Creek Regulation Summary X-Lake Rabideux Creek Lake Creek Moose Creek Kroto Creek Yentna River Montana Creek Oshetna River Unit 4 Goose Sheep Creek Kahiltna River Ck. The Susitna River from its Bulchitna Caswell Creek North Fork Kashwitna Unit 1 Lake mouth to and including the Greys Ck. Page 19 Deshka River. Kashwitna Skwentna River (196 Mile) River Deshka River Willow Unit 2 The Susitna River upstream tle Creek Yentna River it Unit 2 of the Deshka River. L Page 22 Canyon Creek Willow Creek The Susitna River Talachulitna R. Fish Creek Deception Creek Unit 3 upstream from the Alexander Creek MatanuskaGlenn R. Hwy Talachulitna Ck. Page 28 Talkeetna River to the Oshetna River. Wasilla Palmer Unit 4 Parks Hwy The Yentna River drainage. Page 30 Unit 5 The Talkeetna River drainage. KNIK ARM Page 32 West Cook Inlet Unit 1 See pages 15-17 Unit 6 S u s i t n a The Chulitna River drainage. Page 34 COOK INLET Petersville Rd SUSITNA RIVER DRAINAGE - Unit 1 GENERAL REGULATIONS Kroto Creek Kroto Unit 5 See pages 32-33 Lake Inclusive waters: From the mouth of the Susitna River upstream to its confluence with the Deshka River (including the Deshka River drainage, but excluding the MP Yentna River drainage)—the waters of the Susitna River and its westside tributaries, 79.5 and all eastside waters within ½ mile of the Susitna River Unit 4 Unit 1 The Fishing Season for all species is open year-round unless otherwise noted below.
    [Show full text]
  • Matanuska-Susitna Borough
    State of Alaska Coastal Impact Assistance Program APPENDIX B-2 Project Descriptions Direct to Coastal Political Subdivision Funding Approved Projects MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH Tier 1 Projects “Protect the Edge: Where the Water Meets the Land” a Full- AKCIAP_CPS_MSB_T1-01 color 80 Page Publication and DVD About Protecting Riparian Habitat and Wetlands Ortho-rectified Imagery and LiDAR of the Matanuska-Susitna AKCIAP_CPS_MSB_T1-02 Borough’s Coastal Management Zone Tier 2 Projects Groundwater Availability Assessment for the Matanuska- AKCIAP_CPS_MSB_T2-01 Susitna Valley Area 1 Matanuska-Susitna Borough Photo by: Frankie Barker Brief History: Located in the heart of southcentral Alaska, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough is the third largest borough in Alaska, encompassing 24,000 square miles. By 1920, mining for gold and coal and construction of the Alaska railroad sustained the local population. During the depression the Federal Emergency Relief Administration established the Matanuska Colony, settled by homesteaders who led an agricultural lifestyle. Construction of the statewide road system and rich farmlands fueled population growth. Today, borough residents enjoy a more rural lifestyle close to metropolitan Anchorage. The landscape is comprised of mountain ranges and valleys, glaciers, rivers, and lakes, wetlands, tundra, and boreal forest. Gravel reserves found in the borough’s coastal zone are its most important current mineral exports. Pg. 38 State of Alaska Pronunciation: (mat-uh-NOO-skuh) (soo-SIT-nuh) Population(2007): 82,515 Shoreline: 75 miles Coastal Area: 4,149 square miles Annual Precipitation: 16.5” Hours of Daylight Summer: 19 hours, 33 min Hours of Daylight Winter: 5 hours, 19 min Regional Native Corporation: Athna Inc., Doyon Ltd., Cook Inlet Regional Inc.
    [Show full text]