Botany and Wetlands Study Report

Swan Lake Expansion Project (FERC Project No. 2911)

Revised Final April 2013

Ketchikan, Alaska

Prepared by:

Kathryn Beck, Botanist Beck Botanical Services, and

Karen Brimacombe, Ecologist Tetra Tech Bothell, Washington and McMillen, LLC Boise, Idaho

Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Project Description ...... 1 1.2 Purposes of the 2012 Environmental Field Program...... 3 1.3 Changes Made to the Study Plan in Response to Comments or Permit Conditions ...... 3 1.4 Compliance with Permit Terms, Conditions, and Regulatory Framework ...... 3 1.4.1 Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan...... 4 1.4.2 Clean Water Act ...... 6 1.4.3 Other Regulations ...... 6

2 Procedures ...... 6 2.1 Analysis Area ...... 6 2.2 Pre-Field Contact with Forest Service and Review of Existing Information ...... 7 2.3 Field Investigation Surveys ...... 7 2.3.1 Sensitive and Rare Plants ...... 8 2.3.2 Wetland Resources ...... 8

3 Environmental Setting ...... 8 3.1 Vegetation Resources ...... 9 3.2 Sensitive Plants ...... 10 3.3 Rare Plants ...... 11 3.4 Plant Species Newly Documented in Alaska ...... 13 3.5 General Vegetation Types ...... 13 3.6 Invasive Plants ...... 15 3.7 Wetland Resources ...... 15 3.7.1 Forested Wetlands ...... 17 3.7.2 Emergent Sedge Wetlands ...... 17 3.7.3 Moss Muskegs ...... 17

4 Project Effects ...... 18 4.1 Identified Issues and Concerns for Sensitive Plants ...... 18 4.1.1 Spatulate moonwort (Botrychium spathulatum W.H.Wagner) ...... 19

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page i Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

4.1.2 Edible thistle (Cirsium edule var. macounii (Greene) D.J.Keil) ...... 19 4.1.3 Mountain lady’s slipper (Cypripedium montanum Douglas ex Lindl.) ...... 19 4.1.4 Large Yellow Lady’s Slipper Orchid (Cypripedium parviflorum Salisb. var. pubescens (Willdenow) O. W. Knight) ...... 20 4.1.5 Calder’s lovage (Ligusticum calderi Math. & Const.) ...... 20 4.1.6 Alaska Rein Orchid (Piperia unalascensis (Spreng.) Rydb.) ...... 20 4.1.7 Lesser Round‐Leaved Orchid (Platanthera orbiculata (Pursh) Lindl.) ...... 21 4.1.8 Kruckeberg’s swordfern (Polystichum kruckebergii W.H. Wagner) ...... 21 4.2 Identified Issues and Concerns for Rare Plants ...... 22 4.2.1 Maidenhair spleenwort (Asplenium trichomanes L. ssp. trichomanes) ...... 22 4.2.2 Brightgreen spleenwort (Asplenium trichomanes‐ramosum L.) ...... 22 4.2.3 Boreal bedstraw (Galium kamtschaticum Steller ex Schult & Schult) ...... 23 4.2.4 Northern bugleweed (Lycopus uniflorus Michx.) ...... 23 4.2.5 Bog adder’s‐mouth orchid (Malaxis paludosa (L.) Swartz) ...... 24 4.2.6 Choris’ bog‐orchid (Platanthera chorisiana (Cham.) Reichenb.) ...... 25 4.2.7 Pacific Buttercup (Ranunculus pacificus (Hulten) L.D.Benson) ...... 25 4.3 Identified Issues and Concern for Plants Newly Documented in Alaska ...... 26 4.3.1 Wallace’s spikemoss (Selaginella wallacei Heiron.) ...... 26 4.3.2 Bog St. John’s‐wort (Hypericum anagalloides Cham. & Schltdl.) ...... 27 4.4 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for Sensitive and Rare Plants . 27 4.5 Identified Issues and Concerns for General Vegetation ...... 28 4.5.1 Old‐Growth Forest ...... 28 4.5.2 Young Growth Forest ...... 29 4.6 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for General Vegetation ...... 29 4.7 Identified Issues and Concerns to Wetland Resources ...... 30 4.7.1 Effects from Rising Reservoir Levels Within the Analysis Area ...... 30 4.7.2 Effects from Construction‐related Activities Occuring at and Below the Dam ...... 31 4.8 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for Wetland Resources ...... 32

5 References ...... 32

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page ii Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

TABLES

Table 1. Known or Suspected Sensitive Plants in the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District .... 10 Table 2. Rare Plants Observed within the Analysis Area ...... 11 Table 3. General Vegetation Types in the Analysis Area1/ ...... 13 Table 4. Acres of Wetland Resources in the Analysis Area1/ ...... 15

FIGURES

Figure 1. Project Vicinity ...... 2 Figure 2. Rare Plants Observed within the Survey Study Area ...... 12 Figure 3. Vegetation Communities in the Analysis Area ...... 14 Figure 4. Wetlands in the Survey Study Area ...... 16

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 Response to Agency Comments Received Attachment 2 Forest Service Alaska Region Sensitive Species List, May 2012 Attachment 3 Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List Attachment 4 Swan Lake Project Area Photos Attachment 5 Botanical Survey Types Attachment 6 Rare Plant Element Occurrence Field Forms Attachment 7 Description of Rare Plant Populations

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page iii Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AKNHP Alaska Natural Heritage Program BMP Best Management Practices CFR Code of Federal Regulations EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ft feet FSH Forest Service Handbook FSM Forest Service Manual GIS geographic information system GPS global positioning system ICD Initial Consultation Document LUD land use designation MMI Mass Movement Index mi miles NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NMFA National Forest Management Act NF National Forest NFS National Forest System NWI National Wetlands Inventory PMF probable maximum flood Project Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project SEAPA Southeast Alaska Power Agency SMU Soil Management Units TES threatened, endangered and sensitive USDA United States Department of Agriculture USFS United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page iv Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description The Southeast Alaska Power Agency (SEAPA) is the licensee for the Swan Lake Project, Federal Energy Regulatory (FERC) No. 2911 (Project), on the northeast side of Carroll Inlet in Southeast Alaska. SEAPA is currently evaluating the engineering feasibility and value of increasing the storage capacity of the Swan Lake reservoir through an increase in the dam height. Around the reservoir, the FERC boundary roughly follows the 350-foot elevation contour on the Project drawings. SEAPA is planning a 15-foot raise in full pool elevation; dam crest elevation would increase from an elevation of 344 feet to 350 feet to accommodate a new Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) of 347 feet. The normal maximum surface area of the reservoir would increase from 330 feet to 345 feet. As a result of the proposed action, the maximum operating pool of the reservoir would change from 330 feet mean sea level (MSL) to 345 feet MSL, thereby increasing the active storage capacity of Swan Lake from 81,704 acre-feet to 102,467 acre-feet (an increase of approximately 25 percent).

It is estimated that there are about 14 miles of shoreline around the reservoir, much of which is moderately to extremely steep (Figure 1). The Project is located in Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 27, Township 29 North, Range 91 East, Copper River Meridian. A portion of the proposed reservoir expansion area may include National Forest System (NFS) lands, particularly in the area of Lost Creek, a tributary that enters the existing reservoir on the northeast side.

The Project’s FERC license sets the Project’s boundary around the reservoir at the 350-foot elevation contour. As currently proposed, the increased reservoir will be entirely contained within the existing boundary; but it’s possible that a revision of this boundary may be necessary to allow for operation and maintenance of the Project and to accommodate other Project purposes such as recreation, shoreline control, or protection of environmental resources. Any proposed changes to the facilities, the operation of the reservoir, and potential changes to the Project boundary will require amending the Project’s FERC license, a process that includes evaluating the potential impacts to environmental resources from the proposed action. Two alternatives are evaluated in this report, No Action, as required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and the Proposed Action. The Swan Lake Expansion Project Botany and Wetlands Study Report provides an assessment of the current condition of sensitive and rare plants, general vegetation communities, invasive species, and wetland resources in the analysis area and the potential effects of implementing the proposed alternatives on these resources. The analysis addresses the potential effects associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project. The following analysis uses existing information from spatial GIS data, field survey results, scientific literature, and other sources, as appropriate.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 1 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Figure 1. Project Vicinity

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 2 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

1.2 Purposes of the 2012 Environmental Field Program The purpose of the 2012 environmental field program was to collect baseline environmental information and to evaluate the potential for impacts to environmental resources resulting from the proposed 15-foot increase in pool elevation and construction of the elevated dam (i.e., between the 330-foot and 350-foot elevation); however, some terrestrial resources investigated areas below the dam and aquatic habitat was characterized up to Lost Lake. Results of these studies will help inform discussions about the necessary range of environmental analyses to support the FERC amendment process. Potential areas of environmental concern include potential impacts from the proposed action on (1) the fish and aquatic community and associated habitat, and (2) terrestrial vegetation and wildlife and features such as soils and cultural resources.

1.2.1 Changes to Draft Study Reports and Development of NEPA Documents The 2012 field efforts focused primarily on the area above the dam within the proposed inundation zone around Swan Lake and its major tributaries. In review of the results of these studies on February 27 2013, it was agreed that a series of NEPA-supporting Resource Reports would address the majority of the comments received on the various study reports (see Attachment 1). The Resource Reports will comprehensively describe all field work and analysis conducted in support of the proposed action at an appropriate scale for each resource, and breakout the potential impacts by land ownership as appropriate. In the February 27 meeting with agencies, it was acknowledged that the remaining field work needs were limited after the 2012 effort, but additional analysis and desktop work will be done to complement the existing data in 2013. Once the results from the Resource Reports and draft Biological Assessments/ Biological Evaluations (BA/BE) have been reviewed, these will be discussed with participants in a coordinated forum and appropriate mitigation measures per resource area will be discussed. These will be included as part of the License Amendment in the form of a Draft Environmental Assessment.

Attachment 1 of this report provides a response to general and resource-specific agency comments on the draft Study Report. This Revised Final Study Report incorporates the comments as appropriate. Where changes were not made, they are noted and will be addressed in greater detail in a future Resource Report.

1.3 Changes Made to the Study Plan in Response to Comments or Permit Conditions No changes were made to the pre-field study plan in response to permit conditions.

1.4 Compliance with Permit Terms, Conditions, and Regulatory Framework Management activities on National Forest System (NFS) lands are required to comply with the Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) and federal and state laws. Relevant

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 3 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

standards and regulations intended to protect botanical and wetland resources are summarized in the subsections below.

1.4.1 Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan The Forest Plan is the governing document for management activities that take place within the Tongass National Forest (Forest Service 2008). It consists of three parts that work together to facilitate the development of management activities. These parts include: forest goals and desired conditions for resources; the management prescriptions for each of the 19 land use designations (LUDs); and the Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines, which apply to all or most areas of the Forest and provide for the protection and management of forest resources.

1.4.1.1 Sensitive and Rare Plants

Standards and Guidelines direct the Forest Service to “Avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to rare plants and populations during project planning to maintain known distributions throughout the Tongass National Forest.”

A sensitive plant is one that is included on the 2009 Forest Service Alaska Region Sensitive Species List (Attachment 2).

A rare plant on the Tongass National Forest is defined as a plant species that:

• is on the Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP) Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List (AKNHP 2012) and is known or suspected to occur on the Tongass, is considered S1 or S2 in State ranking (some S3s are considered), and is not yet on the sensitive plant list for the Tongass. • is proposed upon consultation and agreement among Tongass ecologists, District botanists, and the Region 10 botanist because of rarity on the Tongass (i.e., plants with range edges or disjunct populations on the Tongass but that have not yet been given a state ranking on the AKNHP list). • has population viability concerns on the Tongass, but is not yet on the sensitive plant list. • has been or is being raised as an issue because of rarity or conservation concerns (through the NEPA process). The list of rare plants is dynamic; plants may be dropped when they are found to be more abundant than previously thought, or added if they are newly found in the state or Forest. Plants may also be added or dropped as their taxonomic status changes. Generally, the Tongass list is based on the AKNHP rare plant tracking list. The Forest Service and other agencies contribute rare plant occurrence information to the AKNHP for database inclusion. The plants considered sensitive on the Tongass are also on the AKNHP rare plant tracking list. See Attachment 3 for the updated 2012 AKNHP rare plant list.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 4 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Each rare plant in the AKNHP tracking list has a state ranking (S1 to S5) as well as a global ranking (G1 to G5). An S1 (G1) rank is defined as the most critically imperiled plants in the state (and world), while an S5 (G5) is secure in the state (and world) (AKNHP 2012). AKNHP rankings are shown at the end of Attachment 3. The AKNHP plant tracking list changes as previously unknown populations of rare plants are discovered or when taxa new to Alaska are discovered.

1.4.1.2 Wetland Resources

Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines for wetlands that apply and provide for resource protection across the Forest (Forest Service 2008, Chapter 4). Forest-wide standards and guidelines for wetlands include the following (Forest Service 2008, p. 4-88):

Wetlands: WET

III. Land Use Activities

A. The discharge of dredged or fill material onto wetlands is regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Certain categories of activities are exempt from regulation, while others may be permitted (refer to 33 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 323.4 Part 330 Appendix A 325). Consult with the Corps early in the planning process to determine whether a 404 permit is required. For non-exempt activities, permit requirements may include compensation or replacement of any lost aquatic function. B. Consistent with the Clean Water Act, as amended, use Best Management Practices (BMPs) in all management activities that could affect water quality of wetlands. BMPs are intended to ensure that flow and circulation patterns, as well as chemical and biological characteristics of water are not impaired. (Forest Service Handbook [FSH] 2509.22, BMP 12.5) C. Before issuing authorizations, leases, easements, rights-of-way, or exchanging lands containing wetlands, identify uses that are restricted under identified Federal, state, or local wetlands regulations. Incorporate appropriate restrictions, where necessary, to protect or minimize wetland impacts, or withhold such properties from exchange. D. Cooperate with state and Federal agencies having overlapping resource management responsibilities for wetlands, including the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Corps, EPA, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. E. Mitigate to minimize impacts caused by activities when BMPs do not perform as expected. G. When decommissioning roads through wetlands, restore natural drainage patterns. H. Timber harvest may occur on forested wetlands that meet suitable criteria and are in development LUDs.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 5 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

1.4.2 Clean Water Act Discharges of dredged or fill material into wetlands are regulated through Section 404 of the Clean Water Act by the Corps and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Corps and EPA regulate wetlands on private, state, and federal land.

Under Section 404, the Corps issues a number of nationwide permits for different types of activities that result in minimal individual and cumulative adverse effects on the aquatic environment. Permanent wetland losses greater than 0.5 acre or stream impacts greater than 300 linear feet require an individual permit.

1.4.3 Other Regulations Other applicable regulations include the following:

• The National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA) states that forest planning must “provide for the diversity of plant and animal communities based on the suitability and capability of the specific land area” (Forest Service 1976). • USDA Departmental Regulations 9500-004 states that the National Forest will provide habitats for all existing native and desired non-native plants, fish and wildlife species to maintain at least a viable population of such species (USDA 1983). • 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 219.19 (2000) states “For planning purposes, a viable population shall be regarded as one which has the estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals to insure its continued existence is well distributed in the planning area. In order to insure that viable populations will be maintained, habitat must be provided to support, at least, a minimum number of reproductive individuals and that habitat must be well distributed so that those individuals can interact with others in the planning area.”

2 PROCEDURES

2.1 Analysis Area The survey study area for direct and indirect effects to sensitive and rare plants, general vegetation communities, invasive species, and wetland resources includes the area within the FERC Boundary (Figure 1). For this project, the survey study area includes the area between the current spillway crest elevation (330 feet) and the proposed new dam crest elevation of350 feet (3 feet of freeboard above the PMF of 347 feet). It is estimated that there are about 14 miles of the Swan Lake reservoir shoreline at the 350-foot elevation contour; including portions of Lost Creek, Track Creek, Mint Creek, and Fry Creek. The survey study area focused on the area above the dam and is estimated to be 140.3 acres in size. However, additional surveys for sensitive and rare plants, general vegetation communities, invasive species, and wetland resources were

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 6 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

conducted below the dam and near existing facilities in an effort to gather baseline information to address potential impacts from construction activities. This area included a 150-foot buffer around areas where temporary and permanent construction activities (e.g., laydown yards, existing road improvements) associated with the proposed project would likely occur. Additional information for this area will be provided in a Future Resource Report which will further support the NEPA process.

2.2 Pre-Field Contact with Forest Service and Review of Existing Information Prior to field surveys, a pre-field review of the analysis area was conducted (Tetra Tech 2012a) and approved by Rick Turner, USDA Forest Service Ecologist. No species on the Alaska Region Sensitive Plant List have previously been documented in the analysis area although several species have previously been documented in the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District.

Habitat information in the analysis area was assessed based on information obtained from GIS, reviews of aerial photographs, and discussions with resource specialists. Habitat types likely to occur in the analysis area include forest edge, coniferous forest, rocky areas, rock outcrops, ridgetops, cliffs, gravel, seeps, wet areas, riparian areas, streambanks, ponds, shallow freshwater marshes, muskeg, waterfalls, lake margins, fens, and sandy areas. Based on the variety of habitats present, it was determined that eight of the sensitive species on the Alaska Region Sensitive Plant List (Attachment 2) have a reasonable potential to occur in the analysis area.

The data reviewed for wetland resources in the analysis area was based on the Tongass National Forest wetland mapping layer. This GIS mapping layer has been modified from the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, through the inclusion of the common wetland types present in Southeast Alaska. Additionally, the Ketchikan Area soil survey for the Tongass NF area was reviewed to determine the potential location of hydric soils within the analysis area.

2.3 Field Investigation Surveys Field surveys for botanical and wetland resources were conducted in the analysis area from August 6-10, 2012. Field surveys included the shoreline of Swan Lake and along the banks of Lost Creek up to the 350-foot elevation level. Surveys were dispersed throughout the analysis area in a variety of habitat types, elevations and aspects. The surveys were done primarily by boat because steep terrain and dense vegetation restricted the ability to survey the majority of the shoreline on foot (see Attachment 4, Swan Lake Project Area Photos). The boat traveled close to the shore and binoculars were used to search the shore. At the time of the survey, the water level was at its current maximum height of 330 feet, giving surveyors an optimal view. Botanists and ecologists walked the shoreline and creek margins in the limited areas where slope and vegetation density allowed.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 7 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

2.3.1 Sensitive and Rare Plants Focused intuitive controlled surveys for sensitive and rare plants were conducted within the analysis area (see Attachment 5 for a general description of botanical survey types). This survey type involves identifying suitable habitat for targeted species and then focusing the survey effort within those identified habitats. The field surveys were conducted from August 6 to 10, 2012, an appropriate time of year to identify targeted species.

No populations of sensitive plant species were identified in the analysis area during field surveys. Populations of two rare plant species were identified and mapped as a result of field surveys for this project. Additionally, two plant species not included on the 2012 AKNHP Rare Vascular Plant List but considered species of interest for the Tongass National Forest were observed in the analysis area (see Section 3.3). Based on field surveys, the location of each population was mapped and digitized and a plant count or estimate was made for each. Plant Survey Field forms and a spreadsheet identifying all plant species observed in the analysis area were also prepared and are included in the project record. Additionally, Region 10 (R10) Threatened and Endangered Species (TES) Plant Element Occurrence field forms were completed according to protocol for the Alaska Region for rare plants in the analysis area and are included in Attachment 6.

2.3.2 Wetland Resources Several wetland types were observed during field surveys. These include forested wetlands, emergent wetlands, and moss muskegs (Attachment 4, Swan Lake Project Area Photos). Wetland resources were mapped, to the extent possible, using a Trimble GeoXH global positioning system unit (GPS). Wetlands that could not be mapped using GPS were hand- delineated on aerial maps using the Tongass NF wetland layers and hydric soils layers from the Ketchikan area soil survey for the Tongass NF to help refine the boundaries.

3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The Tongass National Forest, including Revillagigedo Island, is dominated by temperate rainforest. The maritime climate is characterized by cool, wet summers and mild winters with significant precipitation as snow and rainfall. In Ketchikan, approximately 23 miles southwest of the study area, typical summer temperatures average 60-65° F, while winter temperatures average 39-44°F. The year-round average temperature is 51.6° F. Annual precipitation as rainfall averages 117 inches, with the least precipitation (16 percent) occurring from May through July. The wettest month is October with an average of more than 22 inches accumulation. Snowfall accumulation averages 37 inches per year, with the most snow accumulating in January (35 percent) (Western Regional Climate Center 2012). The study area lies about 300 to 350 feet higher in elevation than Ketchikan.

Southeast Alaska is geologically composed of linear belts of tectonic assemblages that lie sub-parallel to, and have been accreted to, the continental margin. This coastal group of

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 8 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

mountainous islands lies west of the mainland coast range. This area has been subjected to isostatic and tectonic uplift, as well as glacial and other climatic weathering processes (Forest Service 1996). Bedrock in the project area is made up of the Taku terrane and includes “metamorphosed marine shales and muddy sandstones, metamorphosed andesites, basalts, and rhyolite lavas, along with small amounts of limestone, marble, and conglomerate” (Connor and O’Haire 1988:10). Many of the lakes, valleys, and mountains in and around the project area are the result of more recent glaciation.

3.1 Vegetation Resources The Swan Lake Expansion analysis area is located on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District on Revillagigedo Island in southeast Alaska, 22 miles northeast of Ketchikan. The Tongass National Forest, including Revillagigedo Island, is covered primarily by temperate rainforest consisting of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), with lesser amounts of mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana), Alaska yellow cedar (Callitropsis [Chamaecyparis] nootkatensis), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta). Common understory species include oval-leaf blueberry (Vaccinium ovalifolium), Alaska blueberry, (Vaccinium alaskanse), Devil’s club (Oploplanax horridum), thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), twisted-stalk (Streptopus spp.), queen’s cup (Clintonia uniflora), three-leaf foamflower (Tiarella trifoliata), and lady fern (Athyrium filix- femina).

Red alder (Alnus rubra) and Sitka alder (Alnus viridis ssp. sinuata) occupy riparian areas and other sites, such as avalanche chutes, where bare mineral soils are exposed. On Revillagigedo Island, extensive forest areas have been logged. Plant communities in these areas have changed to early successional types that differ in character than old growth forests. Regeneration is rapid and most of the logged areas are covered by dense stands of young growth.

As described above, the project analysis area includes a narrow perimeter of land around Swan Lake and a stretch approximately 0.8 mile along Lost Creek extending up the banks to an elevation of 350 feet. Most of the lake perimeter, including the banks of the four main creeks entering the lake, is characterized by very steep forested slopes. Rock outcrops, avalanche chutes, and waterfalls also occur along the lake perimeter (Attachment 4). The vegetation growing on the steep slopes is primarily coniferous forest with a dense shrub understory. Shrublands and areas of herbaceous vegetation typically occur in or adjacent to avalanche chutes and waterfalls. In addition to forest and shrublands, there is a riparian vegetation community associated with Lost Creek. Various wetland types are also found dispersed throughout the analysis area (see Section 4.2 below). Plant communities in the analysis area are largely unaltered by human activity.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 9 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

3.2 Sensitive Plants A total of 18 plant species and one lichen have been designated as Sensitive on the Alaska Regional Forester’s list; 16 of these are known or suspected to occur on the Tongass National Forest (Attachment 2). Of the species with habitats similar to those present within the Swan Lake Expansion analysis area, three of these species have been documented on the Ketchikan- Misty Fiords Ranger District. The Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District is also within the potential range of an additional five species, which are suspected to occur on the District. Table 1 summarizes the general habitat requirements of the eight plant species that are either known to occur or suspected to occur on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District and for which potential habitat may be present within the analysis area. No populations of sensitive species were located during surveys of the analysis area.

Table 1. Known or Suspected Sensitive Plants in the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District Scientific Name Common Name Presence1/ Habitat Botrychium spathulatum Spatulate moonwort Suspected Maritime and upper beach meadows, well drained open areas, limestone, alpine habitats, disturbed areas Cirsium edule var. macounii Edible thistle Known Moist to mesic meadows, open forests, talus slopes, in subalpine to alpine areas Cypripedium montanum Mountain lady’s slipper Suspected Open forest, beach meadows, peatlands, wet meadows Cypripedium parviflorum var. Large yellow lady’s Suspected Peatlands, occ. on limestone substrates, pubescens slipper open forested habitats, dry meadows Ligusticum calderi Calder’s lovage Suspected Limestone, wet to moist sites in the subalpine and alpine, rock habitats Piperia unalascensis Alaska rein orchid Suspected Forested areas, dry to mesic meadows, roadsides and forest/ muskeg edges, streamsides Platanthera orbiculata Lesser round-leaved Known A variety of habitats, most commonly in orchid forested habitats and along the forested muskeg edge. Found in both old and young growth. Polystichum kruckebergii Kruckeberg’s swordfern Known Sheltered cracks in ultramafic outcrops 1/ Known -- known to occur in the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District. Suspected -- suspected to occur in the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 10 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

3.3 Rare Plants The target rare plant species list for this project is the AKNHP 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (Attachment 3). The list includes species with a State Ranking of S1, S2, and S3. As noted earlier, the list changes periodically with plants added or dropped as additional information on plant viability, distribution, and taxonomy is learned. Even though boreal bedstraw (Galium kamtschaticum), broadlipped twayblade (Listera convallarioides) and Choris’ bog-orchid (Platanthera chorisiana) are not included on the 2012 AKNHP Rare Vascular Plant List, they are considered species of interest for the Tongass National Forest.

Populations of two rare plant species: northern bugleweed (Lycopus uniflorus) and Pacific buttercup (Ranunculus pacificus), were found during surveys within the analysis area (Figure 2; Table 2). Additionally, populations of five plant species: boreal bedstraw (Galium kamtschaticum), Choris’ bog-orchid (Platanthera chorisiana), maidenhair spleenwort (Asplenium trichomanes ssp. trichomanes), brightgreen spleenwort (Asplenium trichomanes-ramosum), and bog adder’s-mouth orchid (Malaxis paludosa) that were on the AKNHP 2008 Rare Vascular Plant List (AKNHP 2008) but were subsequently removed were found in the analysis area or as noted, just outside of the analysis area (Table 2).

Table 2. Rare Plants Observed within the Analysis Area Global Rank/ State Common Name Scientific Name Rank Typical Habitat Population Location in the Analysis Area Maidenhair Asplenium G5 / S4 Cliffs, dry to mesic 1 population (2 small sub-populations) spleenwort1/ trichomanes non-limestone rocks along the north shore of Swan Lake; an ssp. additional population is located along an trichomanes existing road in the project area but is not in the analysis area. Brightgreen Asplenium G5 / S4 Cliffs, dry to mesic 1 small population along an existing road in spleenwort1/ trichomanes- rocks the project area road, which is not in the ramosum analysis area. Boreal Galium G5 / Moist woods, 1 population along a stream terrace of Lost bedstraw1/, 2/ kamtschaticum S42/,3/ thickets, meadows Creek. Northern Lycopus G5 / Wet meadows, 2 populations; 1 scattered around shore of bugleweed uniflorus S3S43/ streambanks, Swan Lake and 1 along an existing road in roadside ditches the project area but is not in the analysis area. Bog adder’s- Malaxis G5 / S4 Open Sphagnum 1 small population; in muskeg on south mouth orchid1/ paludosa bogs, swampy shore of Swan Lake. woods Choris’ Platanthera G3G4 / Marshes, thicket 1 small population; in muskeg on shore of bog-orchid1/, 2/ chorisiana S43/ edges, wet habitats Swan Lake. Pacific buttercup Ranunculus G3 Along streams and 1 small population in the Lost Creek area. pacificus /S3S4 meadows 1/ Species listed on the 2008 AKNHP Rare Vascular Plant List but dropped from the 2012 list (AKNHP 2008; AKNHP 2012). 2/ Not included on the 2012 AKNHP Rare Vascular Plant List but considered species of interest for the Tongass NF. 3/ Indicates that the rank is preliminary (AKNHP 2012) Sources: Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973; Hulten 1968.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 11 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Figure 2. Rare Plants Observed within the Survey Study Area

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 12 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

3.4 Plant Species Newly Documented in Alaska Populations of two plant species, Wallace’s spikemoss (Selaginella wallacei) and bog St. John’s- wort (Hypericum anagalloides), that have not previously been documented in Alaska were observed in the Swan Lake Expansion Project analysis area. Sources checked for distribution of these species include: the Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria (2012), Plants National Database (USDA NRCS 2012), and University of Alaska Museum of the North Herbarium.

3.5 General Vegetation Types Four general vegetation types are present in the analysis area: old-growth, young-growth, unproductive forest and forested muskeg areas (Figure 3; Table 3). Additionally, a small percentage (approximately 2.2 percent) of the analysis area consists of open water associated with the Swan Lake Reservoir. General vegetation types were mapped using the Tongass NF’s Size and Density Mapping Model (SD7 model) that categorizes vegetation into seven categories.

The predominant vegetation type in the analysis area is old-growth forest which makes up approximately 104.6 acres, or 74.6 percent of the analysis area (Table 3). Approximately 17.5 acres (12.5 percent) of the analysis area consist of unproductive forest. Unproductive forest is defined as forest land incapable of yielding crops of industrial wood because of adverse site conditions (Forest Service 2008, Chapter 7). Young growth forest comprises approximately 4.6 acres (3.2 percent) of the analysis area. Young growth characteristics vary with age; the youngest stands are typically densely vegetated with a mix of young saplings and a dense shrub layer. As these stands progress in age, they develop a canopy that is predominantly closed and consequently has limited understory vegetation.

Table 3. General Vegetation Types in the Analysis Area1/ Acres in the Analysis Vegetation Type Area Percent of the Analysis Area Old Growth 104.6 74.6 Young Growth 4.6 3.2 Forested Muskeg 10.5 7.5 Unproductive Forest 17.5 12.5 Water2/ 3.1 2.2 Total 140.3 100 1/ Data comes from the Tongass NF tree Size and Density mapping model (SD7). 2/ This area is based on GIS analysis and is primarily the result of resolution of map layers; includes the area of Lost Creek within the FERC boundary.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 13 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Figure 3. Vegetation Communities in the Analysis Area

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 14 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Approximately 10.5 acres (7.5 percent) of the analysis area was mapped as forested muskeg. Although forested muskeg is considered a wetland type; wetlands are described in Section 3.7 and do not use the category of forested muskeg. Wetland resources in the analysis area, as described in Section 2.3.2, were mapped using a combination of the Tongass NF wetland layers, the hydric soils layers from the Ketchikan area soil survey for the Tongass NF, and wetland boundaries delineated during field surveys of the analysis area in August 2012. The majority of the areas delineated as forested muskeg by the Size and Density Mapping Model (Figure 3) were delineated as a different wetland category based on mapped wetlands described in Section 3.7 and shown on Figure 4. The small remaining areas mapped as forested muskeg based on the SD7 model were not mapped as wetlands using the methods described above and in Section 2.3.2; therefore, the forested muskeg vegetation type is not further discussed in this report.

3.6 Invasive Plants Surveys for Invasive plants were conducted for this project in conjunction with surveys for Sensitive and Rare plants (August 6 to August 10, 2012). Prevention measures for invasive plants would follow the Tongass NF protocols specified in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2000-National Forest Resource Management, Chapter 2080-Noxious Weed Management, Tongass National Forest Supplement–R10-TNF-2000-20007-1.

3.7 Wetland Resources Wetland resources in the analysis area, as described in Section 2.3.2, were mapped using a combination of the Tongass NF wetland layers, the hydric soils layers from the Ketchikan area soil survey for the Tongass NF, and wetland boundaries delineated during field surveys of the analysis area in August 2012. Approximately 55 percent or 77.4 acres of the analysis area consists of wetlands. Several types of wetland communities, including forested wetlands, emergent wetlands, and moss muskegs are found in the analysis area (Figure 4; Table 4; Attachment 4). The different wetland types found in the analysis area are briefly described below.

Table 4. Acres of Wetland Resources in the Analysis Area1/ Wetland Type Acres Percent of Analysis Area1/ Forested Wetlands 60.9 43.4 Emergent Wetlands2/ 15.0 10.7 Moss Muskegs3/ 1.5 1.1

Total 77.4 55.2 1/ Analysis area is approximately 140.3 acres. 2/ Includes areas mapped as tall sedge fens in the Tongass National Forest wetland mapping layer. 3/ As stated above in Section 3.5, forested muskegs mapped using the Forest Service’s Size Density Model Output Layer are not included in the discussion of wetland resources.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 15 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Figure 4. Wetlands in the Survey Study Area

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 16 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

3.7.1 Forested Wetlands Forested wetlands occur on poorly or very poorly drained hydric mineral and organic soils. Forested wetlands are most common on broad glacial valley bottoms, gently sloping hill slopes or benches, but are also commonly found on steep terrain in areas overlaying volcanic geology. These wetlands provide important functions including wildlife habitat, water quality improvement, peak flow reduction and erosion control, organic matter production and export, and nutrient and carbon cycling (Cooke 2005). Forested wetlands may support the transfer of water to downslope resources, function as recharge areas for groundwater and streams, and provide depositional areas for sediment and nutrients.

Forested wetlands are wetlands dominated by vegetation greater than 20 feet in height. The overstory in forested wetlands in the analysis area is varied but typically consists of western hemlock, western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Alaska yellow cedar, and red alder. The understory is often dominated by skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum). Other shrub and herbaceous species occurring in the understory of forested wetlands in the analysis area include seep monkeyflower (Mimulus guttatus), deer cabbage (Nephrophyllidium crista-galli), fowl mannagrass (Glyceria elata [G. striata]), California black currant (Ribes bracteosum), and salmonberry. In the analysis area, approximately 60.9 acres (43.4 percent) consists of forested wetlands.

3.7.2 Emergent Sedge Wetlands Emergent wetlands contain organic soils that are very poorly drained, moderately deep, and are dominated by sedges and grasses. They may include poor fens and rich bogs and there is typically some water flow through. Vegetation in these wetlands typically consist primarily of various sedges and mosses with scattered shrubs. In the analysis area, emergent wetlands were typically found along the margin of Swan Lake adjacent to open water. Species commonly observed in emergent wetlands in the analysis area include Sitka sedge (Carex aquatilis), smoothstem sedge (Carex laeviculmis), bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), marsh cinquefoil (Comarum palustre [Potentilla palustris]), western water hemlock (Cicuta douglasii), scattered willows (Salix sp.), and occasionally small-fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus). These wetlands provide habitat for unique plants and animals, and contribute water to downslope resources, provide carbon and nutrient cycling benefits for watershed function, and provide water storage for flood and erosion control (EPA 2011). In the analysis area, approximately 15 acres (10.7 percent) consists of emergent wetlands. Emergent wetlands mapped in the analysis area include types mapped as freshwater emergent sedge (emergent sedge/FW) and tall sedge fens. A few small emergent wetlands were observed outside the analysis area along existing roads and near existing facilities associated with dam operations.

3.7.3 Moss Muskegs Moss muskegs are characterized by nutrient limiting acid peat bogs, dominated by sphagnum moss and peat deposits. Muskeg wetlands support a distinctive flora which are adapted to life in

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 17 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

these acidic, wet, low-nutrient environments (EPA 2011). Soils in moss muskegs are typically organic peat deposits that accumulate over unconsolidated glacial till or impermeable glacial silts, typically on gentle or nearly level slopes. Moss muskegs often have no significant inflow or outflow of water other than precipitation, thus ponded areas, a result of a high water table, occur within the wetland. These wetlands function as areas of surplus water and peat accumulation creating a stable microclimate and habitat for waterfowl and wildlife, including cranes, black bear, amphibians, mink, and deer. In the analysis area, one moss muskeg was observed north of Track Creek on the southwestern shore of Swan Lake (Figure 4). Plants observed in this wetland included small cranberry (Vaccinium oxycoccos), bog blueberry (Vaccinium uliginosum), alpine laurel (Kalmia microphylla ssp. occidentalis), bog Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum), cottongrass (Eriophorum spp.), sundews (Drosera spp.), threeleaf goldthread (Coptis trifolia), smoothstem sedge, few-flowered sedge (Carex pauciflora), tufted bulrush (Trichophorum cespitosum), sphagnum moss (Sphagnum spp.) and scattered stunted trees including lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta), red alder and Sitka alder. Approximately, 1.5 acres (1.1 percent) of the analysis area consists of muskeg habitat.

4 PROJECT EFFECTS

This section describes the direct and indirect effects on rare and sensitive plants, general vegetation, and wetland resources from the proposed action.

Direct and indirect effects are estimated for rare and sensitive plants based on the impacts to known populations and suitable habitat from the proposed project analysis area. Direct and indirect effects for general vegetation and wetland resources are estimated based on the acres of the analysis area that would be temporarily or permanently impacted by the proposed project.

4.1 Identified Issues and Concerns for Sensitive Plants Three sensitive plant species with potential habitat in the Swan Lake Expansion analysis area have been documented on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District (edible thistle, lesser round-leaved orchid, and Kruckeberg’s swordfern). Five sensitive plant species with potential habitat in the analysis area are suspected on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District (spatulate moonwort, mountain lady’s slipper orchid, large yellow lady’s slipper orchid, Calder’s lovage, and Alaska rein orchid) (Table 1). These eight species, and the potential project effects, are briefly described below. Although they have the potential to occur in the analysis area, none of these species were located during field surveys of the analysis area associated with the Swan Lake Expansion Project.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 18 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

4.1.1 Spatulate moonwort (Botrychium spathulatum W.H.Wagner) On the Tongass NF, spatulate moonwort grows in upper beach meadows, well drained open areas, limestone and alpine habitats (Forest Service 2009). It is suspected on the Ketchikan- Misty Fiordss Ranger District. It was not observed during field surveys conducted for the proposed project. The analysis area does not include beach habitat, limestone or open drained areas, and is located well below the alpine zone, thus a limited amount of potential habitat is present within the analysis area. There are some disturbed areas associated with the immediate area around dam and existing roadways. These areas were surveyed and this species was not observed.

The project would have no direct or indirect effects to known populations or habitat of spatulate moonwort. The risk of adverse effects to this plant is low, as impacts to potential habitat are not likely to result from the project.

4.1.2 Edible thistle (Cirsium edule var. macounii (Greene) D.J.Keil) On the Tongass National Forest, edible thistle grows in moist to mesic meadows, open forests and talus slopes in the subalpine and alpine zones (Forest Service 2009). Although edible thistle is documented on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District, it was not observed during field surveys conducted for the proposed project. The analysis area does not have meadows or talus slopes, and is well below the alpine and subalpine zones, thus potential habitat is not present within the analysis area. In addition, this is a relatively, large, distinctive plant that stands out in its habitat, making it difficult to overlook during surveys.

The project would have no direct or indirect effects to known populations or habitat of edible thistle. The risk of adverse effects to this plant is low, as impacts to potential habitat are not likely to result from the project.

4.1.3 Mountain lady’s slipper (Cypripedium montanum Douglas ex Lindl.) Mountain lady’s slipper may be found in a variety of habitats on the Tongass National Forest, including upper beach meadows, the edge of the beach/forest ecotone, open forest, peatlands, and wet meadows. The mountain lady’s slipper is suspected, but not known, to occur on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District. Although potential habitat is present in the analysis area, this plant was not observed during field surveys.

The project would have no effects to known populations of mountain lady’s slipper. Although potential habitat is present, this plant is not known to occur in the analysis area and was not located during field surveys conducted for this project. Inundation, dam construction, and associated activities under the proposed action could affect potential habitat for this species, and thus, potentially affect undetected populations. Direct effects could occur through inundation, damage by machinery, placement of fill material, road improvements and maintenance. Indirect effects are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 19 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

changes, soil moisture changes resulting from inundation, or introduction of invasive plant species.

4.1.4 Large Yellow Lady’s Slipper Orchid (Cypripedium parviflorum Salisb. var. pubescens (Willdenow) O. W. Knight) On the Tongass NF, large yellow lady’s slipper orchid grows in peat lands and open areas on limestone substrates (Forest Service 2009). There are no known populations of this plant on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District; however, it is suspected to occur. This species was not observed during field surveys conducted for the proposed project.

The project would have no direct or indirect effects to known populations of large yellow lady’s slipper. This plant is not known on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District.

The project would have no direct or indirect effects to potential habitat of large yellow lady’s slipper orchid because very little potential habitat for this species (peatlands on calcareous substrates) occurs within the analysis area. In addition, all (noncalcareous) peatlands habitat in the analysis area were searched during field surveys. It is therefore, unlikely that undetected populations would be affected. The risk of adverse effects to this plant is low, as no suitable habitat is present in the analysis area.

4.1.5 Calder’s lovage (Ligusticum calderi Math. & Const.) Calder’s lovage typically grows on forest edges and dry and wet meadows in the subalpine and alpine zones on the Tongass NF (Forest Service 2009). Calder’s lovage is suspected to occur on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District but was not observed during field surveys conducted for the proposed project. The analysis area does not have calcareous substrates and is well below the alpine and subalpine zones, thus potential habitat is not present within the analysis area.

The project would have no direct or indirect effects to known populations or habitat of Calder’s lovage. The risk of adverse effects to this plant is low, as impacts to potential habitat are not likely to result from the project.

4.1.6 Alaska Rein Orchid (Piperia unalascensis (Spreng.) Rydb.) On the Tongass NF, this orchid grows in dry, open sites, under tall shrubs in the riparian zone, mesic meadows and drier areas in coniferous and mixed evergreen forests from low to subalpine elevations (Forest Service 2009). Alaska rein orchid is suspected on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District. Although it was not observed during field surveys conducted for the proposed project, potential habitat is present within the analysis area.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 20 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

The project would have no effects to known populations of Alaska rein orchid. Although potential habitat is present, this plant is not known to occur in the analysis area and was not located during field surveys conducted for this project. Inundation, dam construction and associated activities under the proposed action could affect potential habitat for this species and thus potentially affect undetected populations. Direct effects could occur through inundation, damage by machinery, placement of fill materials, road widening or improvements, or vegetation clearing activities. Indirect effects are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or soil moisture changes as a result of inundation. Because this plant may grow in a variety of habitats, much of the proposed disturbance that would result from the project has the potential to disturb habitat and undetected individuals.

4.1.7 Lesser Round-Leaved Orchid (Platanthera orbiculata (Pursh) Lindl.) Lesser round-leaved orchid may be found in a variety of habitats on the Tongass NF, although it is most commonly in forested habitats and along the edges of forested muskeg. It has been found in both old and young growth forests. The lesser round-leaved orchid is documented in the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District; however, this plant was not observed during field surveys. Potential habitat for lesser round-leaved orchid is present in the analysis area.

The project would have no effects to known populations of Alaska rein orchid. Although potential habitat is present, this plant is not known to occur in the analysis area and was not located during field surveys conducted for this project. Inundation, dam construction and associated activities under the proposed action could affect potential habitat for this species and thus potentially affect undetected populations. Direct effects could occur through inundation, damage by machinery, placement of fill materials, road widening or improvements, or vegetation clearing activities. Indirect effects are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or soil moisture changes as a result of inundation. Because this plant may grow in a variety of habitats, much of the proposed disturbance that would result from the project has the potential to disturb habitat and undetected individuals.

4.1.8 Kruckeberg’s swordfern (Polystichum kruckebergii W.H. Wagner) On the Tongass National Forest, Kruckeberg’s swordfern grows on talus slopes and rock outcrops in ultramafic areas (Forest Service 2009). Although Kruckeberg’s swordfern is documented on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District, it was not observed during field surveys conducted for the proposed project. The analysis area does not have ultramafic areas, thus potential habitat is not present within the analysis area.

The project would have no direct or indirect effects to known populations or habitat of Kruckeberg’s swordfern. The risk of adverse effects to this plant is low, as impacts to potential habitat are not likely to result from the project.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 21 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

4.2 Identified Issues and Concerns for Rare Plants Populations of two rare plant species, northern bugleweed and Pacific buttercup, were observed in the Swan Lake Expansion analysis area or just outside of the analysis area. Additionally, populations of five plant species that were on the AKNHP 2008 Rare Vascular Plant List (AKNHP 2008) but were subsequently removed, were found in the analysis area and just outside of the analysis area . Potential direct and, indirect impacts to all seven of these species are discussed in the followings sections.

4.2.1 Maidenhair spleenwort (Asplenium trichomanes L. ssp. trichomanes) Maidenhair spleenwort is a small, fern species that typically grows in dry to moist cracks in cliffs. Its range includes much of North America (USDA NRCS 2012). It is known from 11 locations on the Tongass National Forest, but there are no known on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District. On the 2008 AKNHP list, Maidenhair spleenwort was assigned a rank of S1; however, it has subsequently been removed from the rare plant list (AKNHP 2012). A small maidenhair spleenwort population (with two subpopulations) was located in the analysis area. Fewer than 30 plants were observed in the population; however the area was incompletely surveyed. The population was located on seepy, southeast-facing cliffs. This habitat is common within the analysis area. An additional small maidenhair spleenwort population was located along project roads outside of the analysis area.

The proposed project would likely have direct effects on several of the plants in the populations of maidenhair spleenwort along the lakeshore because some of the plants would be inundated by the 15-foot rise in maximum pool elevation. Indirect effects to plants adjacent to, but not directly, inundated are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or water table level changes resulting from inundation. Alternatively, habitat for maidenhair spleenwort may be created by the project if rocks or cliffy habitat is exposed by road improvements or construction activities. The presence of additional undetected populations in the analysis area is likely because this type of habitat is common in the analysis area and the analysis area was not completely surveyed for this species.

4.2.2 Brightgreen spleenwort (Asplenium trichomanes-ramosum L.) Brightgreen spleenwort is a small fern species that typically grows in dry to moist cracks in cliffs. Its range includes western and northeastern North America (USDA NRCS 2012). It is known from 9 locations on the Tongass NF, all of them on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District. Brightgreen spleenwort was assigned a rank of S3 on the 2008 list; however, on the 2012 list it has been assigned a rank of S4 in Alaska (AKNHP 2008; AKNHP 2012). The Rank S4 indicates that the taxon is more common than previously thought and may include species that would be more accurately described as S4S5 or S5 (AKNHP 2012). Because of its S4 rank, it is no longer actively tracked by the AKNHP. A small population of this species was located just outside the analysis area along existing roads associated with dam operations. Fewer than ten plants were observed in the population; however the population was incompletely surveyed. The population was

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 22 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

located on seepy, south-facing cliffs that were created when the Swan Lake Project was initially built. This habitat is common within the analysis area.

Direct and Indirect Impacts

The proposed project would not likely have direct effects to the population because project activities are unlikely to occur in the area where this species was observed (below the dam). Additionally, this species was not observed in the analysis area inundation zone. Indirect effects to plants are possible, potentially occurring as a result of construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the population. Alternatively, habitat for brightgreen spleenwort may be created by the project if rocks or cliffy habitat is exposed by road improvements or construction activities. The presence of additional undetected populations is likely because this type of habitat is common within the analysis area and the area was not completely surveyed for this species.

4.2.3 Boreal bedstraw (Galium kamtschaticum Steller ex Schult & Schult) Boreal bedstraw is a perennial bedstraw species that typically grows in moist, cold coniferous forests and moist places (Schultz 2003). Its range includes much of eastern Canada and several northeastern states, northwestern Canada, Washington, the Aleutian chain and Alaska (USDA NRCS 2012). A total of 51 Element Occurrences have been recorded for this species on the Tongass National Forest. On the 2008 AKNHP rare plant list, boreal bedstraw was assigned a rank of S2; however, on the 2012 list it has been assigned a rank of S4 in Alaska (AKNHP 2008; AKNHP 2012). The Rank S4 indicates that the taxon is more common than previously thought and may include species that would be more accurately described as S4S5 or S5 (AKNHP 2012). Because of its S4 rank, it is no longer actively tracked by the AKNHP.

A single boreal bedstraw population was located in the analysis area on the gently sloped riparian terrace of Lost Creek. Plants were located under dense stands of tall shrubs in forested wetlands and uplands immediately adjacent to forested wetlands. An estimated total of 30 rhizomatous patches were mapped and likely more were present throughout the densely vegetated area.

The proposed project would likely have direct effects on several of the plants in the population because most of the population would be inundated by the 15-foot dam pool raise. Indirect effects to plants not inundated are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or water table level changes resulting from inundation. The presence of additional undetected populations in the analysis area is possible because the analysis area includes additional potential habitat for this species.

4.2.4 Northern bugleweed (Lycopus uniflorus Michx.) Northern bugleweed is a rhizomatous perennial herb in the mint family with square stems and tiny white flowers (see Attachment 4, Swan Lake Project Area Photos). Its habitat includes a

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 23 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

variety of wet habitats. It is widely distributed across North America (USDA NRCS 2012). Northern bugleweed has been assigned the preliminary rank of S3S4 in Alaska (AKNHP 2012). The Rank S3S4 indicates that within the State of Alaska this plant is vulnerable in the state due to restricted range, relatively few populations, recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation (S3)/ apparently secure; uncommon but not rare (S4). It is known from 7 locations on the Tongass National Forest, and 6 locations on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District. In the analysis area, one large populations of northern bugleweed was documented and includes multiple locations in moist or inundated areas around Swan Lake. Another population was observed just outside the analysis area, around the dam and the access road, in moist disturbed sites like gravel roads and wet ditches.

The proposed expansion would likely have direct effects on many rhizomatous clones of individuals in the population. Many of these individuals and clones were under water when observed during field surveys in August 2012; however, they would be exposed when reservoir levels are lower. Individuals underwater but close to the water surface were observable; however, it is not known how far vertically downslope this species was or is able to grow with the current hydrological fluctuation regime. If the dam pool was raised 15 vertical feet it is likely that this species would be able to recolonize the new reservoir margin, depending on the habitat that would be adjacent to the new maximum pool level. Direct effects to the population of this species observed outside of the analysis area could occur through damage by machinery, placement of fill material, and road improvements and maintenance.

Indirect effects to plants are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or water table level changes resulting from inundation, as well as the introduction of invasive plant species from construction and operation of the Project. Additional undetected subpopulations in the analysis area are possible because the shoreline of the entire analysis area was not searched.

4.2.5 Bog adder’s-mouth orchid (Malaxis paludosa (L.) Swartz) Bog adder’s-mouth orchid is a diminutive orchid, with several basal leaves and spike of 2 to 55 small greenish flowers. It grows in open Sphagnum bogs and swampy woods (FNA 2002). Bog adder’s-mouth orchid ranges across northern North America (USDA NRCS 2012). It is known from 18 locations on the Tongass National Forest, and 5 locations on the Ketchikan-Misty Fiords Ranger District. On the 2008 AKNHP rare plant list, boreal bedstraw was assigned a rank of S3; however, on the 2012 list it has been assigned a rank of S4 in Alaska (AKNHP 2008; AKNHP 2012). The Rank S4 indicates that the taxon is more common than previously thought and may include species that would be more accurately described as S4S5 or S5 (AKNHP 2012). Because of its S4 rank, it is no longer actively tracked by the AKNHP. A single bog adder’s-mouth population of several plants was observed in the analysis area on a small muskeg in the south end of the analysis area.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 24 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

The proposed project would likely have direct effects on the population because it would be inundated by the 15-foot increase in maximum pool elevation. There may be additional undetected plants in the muskeg habitat, although the area was well searched. Indirect effects to plants not inundated are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or water table level changes resulting from inundation. The presence of additional undetected populations in the analysis area is unlikely because the analysis area does not include additional muskeg habitat.

4.2.6 Choris’ bog-orchid (Platanthera chorisiana (Cham.) Reichenb.) Choris’ bog-orchid is a diminutive orchid, with two clasping leaves located near the base of the plant and 5-18 small greenish, sessile flowers in a crowded spike. It is an obligate wetland species (Fuentes et al. 2007), which grows in wet places and Sphagnum bogs (Hulten 1968). Choris’ bog-orchid ranges from Japan, through the Aleutian Islands and mainland of Alaska, southward through the Queen Charlotte Islands and Vancouver Island and British Columbia interior into Washington State (Fuentes et al. 2007). It is not known from the Tongass National Forest. On the 2008 AKNHP rare plant list, Choris’ bog-orchid was assigned a rank of S2; however, on the 2012 list it was assigned a rank of S4 (AKNHP 2008; AKNHP 2012). The Rank S4 indicates that the taxon is more common than previously thought and may include species that would be more accurately described as S4S5 or S5 (AKNHP 2012). Because of its S4 rank, it is no longer actively tracked by the AKNHP. A single small Choris’ bog-orchid population was located in the analysis area on a small muskeg on the south end of the analysis area. Two plants were located under a short tree.

The proposed project would likely have direct effects on the population because the population would be inundated by the 15-foot increase in maximum pool level. There may be additional undetected plants in the muskeg although it was well searched. Indirect effects to plants not inundated are also possible; potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or water table level changes resulting from inundation. The presence of additional undetected populations in the analysis area is unlikely because the analysis area does not include additional muskeg habitat for this species.

4.2.7 Pacific Buttercup (Ranunculus pacificus (Hulten) L.D.Benson) Pacific buttercup is a perennial buttercup species with large yellow flowers and dissected leaves. Its habitat is along streams and in meadows (FNA 20). It is an Alaskan endemic known from southeast Alaska and the Aleutian chain (USDA NRCS 2012). Prior to field surveys conducted in August 2012 for the Project, there were no known locations of Pacific buttercup on the Tongass National Forest. Pacific buttercup has been assigned a rank of S3S4 in Alaska (AKNHP 2012). The Rank S3S4 indicates that within Alaska this plant is vulnerable due to restricted range, relatively few populations, recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation (S3); apparently secure; uncommon but not rare (S4). A small Pacific buttercup

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 25 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

population was located in the analysis area, growing on mossy log with a number of other forb species on the riparian terrace of Lost Creek (see Attachment 4, Swan Lake Project Area Photos).

The proposed project would likely have direct effects on the plants in the population because most of the population would be inundated by the 15-foot increase in maximum full pool elevation. Indirect effects to plants not inundated are also possible; potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or water table level changes resulting from inundation. The presence of additional undetected populations in the analysis area is possible, but unlikely because the analysis area includes only limited additional unsurveyed habitat for this species.

4.3 Identified Issues and Concern for Plants Newly Documented in Alaska Populations of two plant species that have not previously been documented in Alaska were observed in the Swan Lake Expansion Project analysis area: Wallace’s spikemoss and bog St. John’s-wort. Potential direct and indirect impacts to these species are discussed in the following sections.

4.3.1 Wallace’s spikemoss (Selaginella wallacei Heiron.) Wallace’s spikemoss is a trailing, herbaceous, spore-producing species that typically grows in open mats on exposed rocky sites (Hitchcock et al. 1973). Its range includes western North America up to British Columbia (USDA NRCS 2012). The farthest north a previously documented population is from near Prince Rupert in British Columbia, approximately 110 miles southeast of Swan Lake.

A small Wallace’s spikemoss population was located in the analysis area. One sterile, trailing plant was observed along the reservoir margin on a seepy, southeast-facing cliff with thick moss. The analysis area; however was incompletely surveyed for this species and this habitat type is common within the analysis area. The specimen was verified by botanist P. Zika (Peter Zika, personal communication, October 2012). Collections of this species will be deposited at the University of Alaska Museum of the North Herbarium and the University of Washington Herbarium.

Direct and Indirect Impacts

The proposed project would likely have direct effects on the one observed individual of Wallace’s spikemoss because at least portion of the plant would be inundated by the 15-foot dam pool raise. Indirect effects to the portions of the plant that were not inundated are also possible. This could potentially occur as a result of light level changes. The presence of additional undetected populations in the analysis area is likely because this type of habitat is common and the analysis area was not completely surveyed for this species.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 26 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

4.3.2 Bog St. John’s-wort (Hypericum anagalloides Cham. & Schltdl.) Bog St. John’s-wort is a small, perennial herb in the St. John’s-wort family with matted stems and tiny, orangish-yellow flowers. Habitat for this species includes a variety of moist to wet habitats. It is widely distributed across western North America (USDA NRCS 2012). The most northern population previously documented is on McCauley Island in British Columbia, approximately 160 miles south of Swan Lake.

In the analysis area, two populations of bog St. John’s-wort were observed. One population was growing on a large floating log mat on open water in Swan Lake. The other was in the vicinity of Lost Creek. Although this species was observed twice in the analysis area, it was not collected.

Direct and Indirect Impacts

The proposed project would likely have direct effects on the bog St. John’s-wort population near Lost Creek because some of the plants would be inundated by the 15-foot dam pool raise. The population on the floating log mat would likely keep floating amidst the 15-foot dam pool raise. Indirect effects to plants not inundated are also possible, potentially occurring as a result of light level changes or water table level changes resulting from inundation. The presence of additional undetected populations in the analysis area is likely because suitable habitat for this species is common in the analysis area and the analysis area was not completely surveyed for this species.

4.4 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for Sensitive and Rare Plants As most populations of rare plants observed in the analysis area would likely be inundated with rising reservoir levels, avoidance of impacts to these populations is not feasible. The following measures are suggested mitigation measures for the impacts to rare species in the analysis area. Final mitigation measures would be developed in collaboration with Forest Service botanist/ecologists.

• Conduct pre-construction surveys for rare plants in areas of potential habitat in the analysis area to obtain population estimates for each rare plant species observed. • If feasible, populations of rare plants will be transplanted, or seeds will be collected and sown, in suitable areas above the inundation zone. These transplanted and/or seeded populations will be monitored for 5 years to determine if they are successfully becoming established and to compare population estimates of transplanted populations with population estimates of impacted populations. • If transplantation or relocation is not possible, conserve and monitor existing populations, outside of the inundation zone, of the rare plant species that will be impacted by inundation.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 27 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

• If any previously undiscovered rare or sensitive plants are encountered at any time prior to or during implementation of this project, the Forest Service botanist/ecologist shall be notified. Following review of the population, avoidance measures or mitigation measures will be applied. These may include the measures listed above. If rare plant populations are observed in areas that won’t be inundated but may be impacted by Project construction the following measures may be implemented:

o Construction activities will be sited to avoid populations of rare plants to the extent possible.

o Exclusion fencing will be placed around rare plant populations to protect plants during construction. Rare plant population descriptions are given in Attachment 7.

4.5 Identified Issues and Concerns for General Vegetation Impacts to old-growth and young-growth forest from the proposed Project are described below. Impacts to forested muskeg habitat is described in Section 4.7. Loss of old-growth trees along the lakeshore and riparian habitat from inundation are a concern. Potential direct and indirect effects are discussed in more detail under Sections 4.5.1 and 4.5.2.

4.5.1 Old-Growth Forest Direct impacts to old-growth forest would result from inundation from the 15-foot increase in maximum full pool reservoir levels. Impacts to old-growth forest from rising reservoir levels would result in the permanent loss of old-growth trees that would be submerged. Rising reservoir levels could also indirectly alter the nature and stability of the adjacent forest. Indirect effects on old growth could occur through changes in hydrology and soil structure and stability not only from rising reservoir levels but also from fluctuating reservoir levels. This could result in additional loss of old-growth trees and/or a change in species composition in areas subjected to rising and fluctuating reservoir levels. Plant species adapted to greater soil moisture and occasional inundation would become established in areas adjacent to the new maximum pool level. The majority of construction activities associated with expansion of the new dam would occur in areas already disturbed or developed for construction of the existing dam. Therefore, old-growth forest would likely not be impacted by construction activities.

Although unlikely, due to the lack of invasive plant species currently present in the analysis area, indirect effects to old-growth forest could also occur from invasive plant spread. Disturbance to or adjacent to old-growth forest could increase the risk for invasive plant establishment. It is assumed that all old growth within the analysis area (approximately 104.6 acres) would be lost over time.

In portions of the project area within state lands, it is assumed that all merchantable trees within the inundation zone would be cut (stumps left intact) and removed where feasible and/or

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 28 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

required by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. A timber cruise will be conducted to estimate the actual amount of timber that would be cut and removed, and a logging plan would be developed and approved by the appropriate agency.

Within those areas of the Project that are within the Tongass NF, there will be no timber removal. A cruise would be conducted at the appropriate time to estimate the amount of merchantable timber that could be lost, and a settlement with the USDA Forest Service will be concluded.

4.5.2 Young Growth Forest As stated above, the majority of construction activities associated with expansion of the new dam would occur in areas already disturbed or developed for construction of the existing dam. Therefore, young-growth forest would likely not be impacted by construction activities. Direct impacts to young growth would potentially result from inundation due to rising reservoir levels. As stated above, the majority of dam construction activities would occur in areas already disturbed or developed for construction of the existing dam. Temporary staging areas and improvements to existing roads; however, may be needed for dam construction and may impact young growth forest. Areas cleared for temporary staging areas would eventually revegetate and become young-growth forest again. If widening of existing roads is required this could result in the permanent loss of young growth forest. To date, there is an insufficient level of detail to fully assess potential construction-related impacts below the dam; however, more discussion in this area will be addressed in a future Resource Report.

Similar to old-growth forest, rising reservoir levels would result in the permanent loss of young growth trees that would be submerged. Rising reservoir levels could also indirectly alter the nature and stability of the adjacent forest. Indirect effects on young-growth forest could occur through changes in hydrology and soil structure and stability not only from rising reservoir levels but also from fluctuating reservoir levels.

Indirect effects to young growth could also occur from invasive plant spread. It is assumed that all young growth within the analysis area (approximately 4.6 acres) would be lost.

4.6 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for General Vegetation The effects of the Swan Lake Dam Expansion Project on forested portions would be limited within the existing FERC boundary as much of the vegetation was removed prior to inundation; however, some additional removal adjacent to the reservoir may been needed. Approximately 26 acres have been identified in the Lost Creek area, which were not part of the original conveyed lands and that additional ground surveys determined the 350-foot contour extending further upstream. The entirety of this area is owned by the USDA Forest Service.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 29 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Avoidance of impacts to productive old-growth resulting from the proposed 15-foot increase in pool elevation; however, would not be feasible. Trees that require removal within the activity area (i.e., between 330 feet and 350 feet) will follow Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines as well as BMPs.

In portions of the project area within state lands, it is assumed that all merchantable trees within the inundation zone would be cut (stumps left intact) and removed where feasible and/or required by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. A timber cruise will be conducted to estimate the actual amount of timber that would be cut and removed, and a logging plan would be developed and approved by the appropriate agency.

Within those areas of the Project that are within the Tongass National Forest, there will be no timber removal. A cruise would be conducted at the appropriate time to estimate the amount of merchantable timber that could be lost, and a settlement with the USDA Forest Service will be concluded.

4.7 Identified Issues and Concerns to Wetland Resources Impacts to wetlands are based on the acres of wetland affected by inundation due to the 15-foot rise of reservoir levels to a new maximum pool elevation of 350 feet. As locations and extent of proposed project activities associated with construction of the expanded dam are not currently known, acres of potential impacts to wetlands from these activities have not been calculated. Direct impacts to wetland resources from the proposed project include acres of wetland affected by construction activities, either as permanent or temporary wetland fill, or as a result of inundation due to the 15-foot increase in maximum full pool reservoir elevation. The majority of activities associated with expansion of the new dam would occur in areas already disturbed or developed for construction of the existing dam; however, wetland impacts in these areas could potentially be impacted. Direct impacts to wetland resources would primarily occur due to inundation. As more information becomes available, impacts to wetlands will be refined for activities above and below the dam. This information will be reported in a future Resource Report. Potential impacts will be broken out impact type, wetland type, and by land ownership.

4.7.1 Effects from Rising Reservoir Levels Within the Analysis Area Rising reservoir levels would flood areas of emergent and forested wetlands and moss muskegs within the analysis area. These areas of wetland resources would be permanently lost due to inundation. Similar wetland communities may develop adjacent to the new reservoir margins depending on steepness of the adjacent slope. Alternatively, rising reservoir levels could indirectly alter the nature and stability of the adjacent wetland vegetation. Approximately 75.9 acres of forested wetlands, 6.1 acres of emergent wetlands, 1.5 acres of moss muskegs, and 10.5 acres of forested muskegs would be permanently lost due to inundation from rising reservoir levels.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 30 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Indirect impacts to wetland resources could also occur from rising and fluctuating water levels in the reservoir in association with dam operation. Changes to hydrology in wetlands adjacent to the new maximum full pool reservoir elevation could impact the functions of these wetlands and alter the species composition of these areas. Alteration of species composition and hydrologic regimes in these wetlands could also result in the loss or modification of wetland habitat. Indirect impacts on wetland habitat through changes in hydrology and soil structure and stability could occur not only from rising reservoir levels but also from fluctuating reservoir levels.

4.7.2 Effects from Construction‐related Activities Occuring at and Below the Dam The focus of the 2012 survey effort was in the area above the dam that may be inundated as a result of the proposed action; however, field staff did collect information on sensitive and rare plants, invasive plant species, and wetlands below the dam and near existing facilities in an effort to provide baseline data in advance of more detailed construction design. The information collected in this area will be refined for activities below the dam and will be presented in more detail in a future Resource Report.

Preliminary information in the area below the dam did not find any forested wetlands or moss muskegs that would be directly or indirectly impacted by construction activities associated with expansion of the new dam. Small amounts of emergent wetland could be directly impacted from construction of temporary staging areas and widening or improving existing roads. Emergent wetlands in areas where construction activities would occur are highly degraded and located in heavily disturbed areas (i.e., adjacent to roads and in roadside ditches).

Functions and values of temporarily impacted emergent wetlands would be restored following the removal of temporary fill and revegetation. Wetland acreage permanently impacted would result in a loss of wetland functions, including water quality improvement, wildlife habitat, and hydrologic functions. However, wetlands that would be permanently impacted are highly degraded and are associated with or adjacent to heavily disturbed areas. Additionally, permanent loss of emergent wetland acreage from construction activities is expected to be minimal.

Indirect impacts to wetland resources could occur from changes to hydrology associated with construction activities. If hydrology of wetlands adjacent to construction activities is altered it could result in a change in the species composition and a loss of wetland functions. Ground or soil disturbance to or adjacent to wetland resources would increase the risk for invasive plant establishment.

As noted above, with more information, impacts to wetlands from construction‐related activities at and below the dam will be refined and addressed in more detail in a future Resource Report.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 31 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

4.8 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for Wetland Resources The effects of the Swan Lake Dam Expansion Project on wetlands would be limited, to the extent possible, through the site-specific application of Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines as well as BMPs for all action alternatives. Temporary staging areas and road improvement or widening activities would be constructed in accordance with the BMPs identified in FSH 2509.22.

Due to the preponderance of wetlands along the perimeter of Swan Lake, avoidance of impacts to wetlands resulting from the proposed 15-foot increase in pool elevation would not be feasible. Quantification of acreage and any associated mitigation measures will be discussed with stakeholders and addressed in upcoming NEPA supported documents including Resource Reports and the License Amendment.

5 REFERENCES

AKNHP (Alaska Natural Heritage Program). 2008. Alaska Natural Heritage Program Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List. Available online at: http://137.229.141.57/wp- content/uploads/2010/11/Rare-Plant-List-2008.pdf.

AKNHP. 2012. Alaska Natural Heritage Program Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List. Available online at: http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/botany/rare-plants-species-lists/2012-rare- vascular-plant-list.

Connor, Cathy, and Daniel O’Haire. 1988. Roadside Geology of Alaska. Mountain Press Publishing Company, Missoula, Montana.

Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria. 2012. Herbarium Specimens from the Pacific Northwest. Available online at: http://www.pnwherbaria.org/index.php

Cooke. 2005. Cooke Scientific Services, Inc. Pacific Northwest Forested Wetland Literature Survey Synthesis Paper. April 2005. 95 pp.

Dillman, K.L., P.C. Crosse, and C. Sever. 2009. Tongass National Forest-Guidance for Biological Evaluations: Sensitive Plants. USDA Forest Service. Tongass National Forest. March.

Elzinga, C. L., D.W. Salzer, and J.W. Willoughby. 1998. Measuring and Monitoring Plant Populations. Technical Reference 1730-1. Bureau of Land Management, National Business Center. Denver, CO.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2011. Environmental Protection Agency. Wetland Types. Available on-line at: http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/bog.cfm

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 32 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Forest Service (United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service). 1976. National Forest Management Act. Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/includes/NFMA1976.pdf

Forest Service. 2008. Tongass National Forest: Land and Resource Management Plan. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Alaska Region: USDA Forest Service, Tongass Land Management Planning Team, Juneau. USDA Forest Service. 2009. Forest Service Alaska Region Sensitive Species List, Assessment and Proposed Revisions to the 2002 List. Tongass National Forest, Alaska.

Fuentes, T.L., L.L. Martin, and A.M. Risvold. 2007. Conservation Assessment for Platanthera chorisiana (Choris’ bog-orchid). USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.

Heithecker, T., and C. Halpern. 2007. Edge-related Gradients in Microclimates in Forest Aggregrates Following Structural Retention Harvests in Western Washington. Forest and Ecology Management 248 (2007) 163-173. May 8, 2007.

Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle and London.

Hulten, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

Schultz, J. 2003. Conservation assessment for boreal bedstraw (Galium kamtschaticum). USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region. Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wildlife/tes/ca-overview/docs/Plant_Galium_kamtschaticum- Boreal_Bedstraw.pdf

Tetra Tech. 2012a. Pre-Field Review Worksheet for Sensitive Plants. Prepared for the Ketchikan- Misty Fiords Ranger District, Tongass National Forest by Kathryn Beck and Steve Negri, Tetra Tech. July.

Tetra Tech. 2012b. Draft Invasive Plant Risk Assessment. Project. Prepared for the Ketchikan- Misty Fiords Ranger District, Tongass National Forest by Karen Brimacombe, Tetra Tech. September.

University of Alaska Museum of the North. 2012. Herbarium (ALA). Available online at: http://www.uaf.edu/museum/collections/herb/

USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). 1983. Fish and Wildlife Policy. Departmental Regulation 9500-004. April 28. Available online at: http://www.ocio.usda.gov/directives/doc/DR9500-004.pdf

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 33 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

USDA NRCS (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2012. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, September 2012). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page 34 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Attachment 1 – Response to Agency Comments

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Item Agency / Date Assigned To Comment [some items paraphrased for brevity, see attached letter for full text] Response General Comments (applies to all study reports) 1 USFS / FMA Page 1, 1.1 Project Description Regarding the potential for FERC boundary In the project description, the potential for FERC boundary changes is acknowledged in February 13, changes, the Forest Service requests a thorough description of the revised project the event that some as yet unidentified Protection, Mitigation, & Enhancement (PME) 2013 boundaries and process involving revision. Changes to the project boundaries may might necessitate such a change. SEAPA feels it’s important to acknowledge this have effects to resources on National Forest System (NFS) lands. possibility. A hypothetical example could be where a measure implemented to manage shoreline erosion requires some revision of the FERC boundary because the area of concern extends past the current boundary.

At this time, SEAPA has no knowledge of what PME’s might be required or whether there would be a change required in the FERC boundary or whether such changes would impact NFS lands. If such a situation arises, it would be identified prior to filing the final license amendment with FERC. Prior to filing the proposed change with FERC (revised Exhibit K maps that would accompany the amendment application) SEAPA would be talking to affected landowners to determine what additional information would be necessary. FERC would conduct a NEPA process that would analyze the effect of the Proposed Action.

Proposed Resolution: Clarification will be made in the Initial Consultation Document elaborating on situations that might warrant such a change and describing the process involved in such a change 2 USFS / Page 2 Figure 1 The Forest Service requests a legend be added to this figure. The Figure 1 has been modified to incorporate this request. February 13, current legend states survey area and since this map is used for all resources, this 2013 is not the case. Please describe the irregular polygon surrounding Swan Lake (conveyed lands).

3 USFS / Page 2 Figure 1 Including another figure showing the 350-ft contour and any Figure 1 has been modified to incorporate this request February 13, proposed revisions to the project boundary would aid readers in understanding 2013 the project area boundary and potential effects to resources. 4 USFS / Page 2 Figure 1 Include maps showing analysis area versus project vicinity map. Figure 1 has been modified to clarify the area of survey. For all resources, the focus of February 13, Many of the stated analysis areas are not logical for the resources (see analysis the 2012 survey efforts were areas that could be directly affected be the proposed 2013 area comments for each resource study). action. This equates to the area within the current FERC Boundary. Future Resource Reports will expand the area of analysis and will further support the NEPA process. 5 USFS / Page 2 Figure 1 Breaking out NFS lands and non-NFS lands within each analysis SEAPA agrees that this delineation will be necessary in the NEPA process. Future February 13, area would strengthen the document and allow for the Forest Service to evaluate documents including the Resource Reports and the License Amendment will include this 2013 NFS lands specifically level of detail. 6 USFS / FMA Compliance with regulatory framework: summary of additional Executive Orders, Additional information will be addressed in the ICD, and updated in future Resource February 13, policies, and statutes not listed. Query regarding additional State requirements Reports as appropriate. 2013 7 USFS / EW None of the reports contain information sufficient to determine what will be done SEAPA agrees that additional information will be necessary in the NEPA process. Future February 13, with debris removed from Swan Lake. The Forest Service requests additional documents including the Resource Reports and the License Amendment will include this 2013 information regarding collection, removal and disposal of debris. This information level of detail. may be included in a current reservoir management plan.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A1-1 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Item Agency / Date Assigned To Comment [some items paraphrased for brevity, see attached letter for full text] Response 8 USFS / EW It is unclear where construction equipment and materials would be staged. Please SEAPA agrees that additional information will be necessary in the NEPA process. Future February 13, provide information and figures showing plans for location of staging areas. If documents including the Resource Reports and the License Amendment will include this 2013 staging is to occur on Forest Service lands please provide at a minimum site and level of detail. erosion control plans which address meeting Tongass National Forest Best Management Practices and State of Alaska water quality standards. Botany & Wetlands Study Report 9 USFS / SN Page 1 Project Description “…provides an assessment of the current condition of Text revised to incorporate the comment. February 13, botanical and wetland resources…” This report also discusses general vegetation 2013 and invasive species. 10 USFS / Page 6 2.1 Analysis Area The “activity area” is incorrectly described to allow a Text has been revised to clarify the area of survey. For this resource, additional surveys February 13, complete assessment of effects to wetlands, sensitive and rare plants and general were conducted below the dam but within the existing FERC Boundary. A Resource 2013 vegetation. The analysis area should include the 150 foot buffer around areas Report and supporting documentation, including a Plant BE and Invasive Species Risk where temporary and permanent construction activities associated with the Assessment, will expand the area of analysis to include more detail on the proposed proposed project would likely occur. This area is located below the dam and near construction activities and use below the dam as that information is available. This will existing facilities; surveys have been taken in these areas. further support the NEPA process. 11 USFS / Page 4 1.4.1.2 Wetland Resources “Consult with the Corp early in the planning SEAPA agrees the additional detail requested will be necessary during the formal NEPA February 13, process to determine whether a 404 permit is required.” We suggested this in our process. Based on agreements from the 2/27/13 stakeholder meeting, NEPA supported 2013 response to the draft study plans. Were they contacted? For the Corps of Resource Reports will comprehensively document all information collected and Engineers to make a jurisdictional determination, the proper wetland consultation that has taken place in an effort to comply with stakeholder protocol. determination forms will have to be used. The Botany & Wetlands Report is particularly lacking soils and hydrologic information necessary to fill out these forms. 12 USFS / Page 4 1.4.3 Other Regulations Suggest reviewing Floodplain Management SEAPA will review the Order and incorporate any necessary documentation into the February 13, Executive Order 11988) for applicability and mitigation requirements. NEAPA supported Resource Reports. 2013 13 USFS / Page 7 2.3.1 Sensitive and Rare Plants Populations of two rare plant species This information was provided in Appendix E and F of the Study Report. These have February 13, were identified and mapped as a result of field surveys…..Additionally, two plant been renamed to Attachment 6 and 7. 2013 species not included on the 2012 AKNHP Rare Vascular Plant List but considered species of interest for the Tongass National Forest were observed …” Please share this information with the Forest Service. 14 USFS / Page 7 2.3.2 Wetland Resources Several wetland types were SEAPA will share the GIS data collected with the USFS. Additional effort and detail February 13, observed…including forested wetlands, emergent wetlands, and moss muskeg. associated with USACE requirements will be incorporated in to the NEPA supported 2013 Were Corps of Engineer wetland determination forms completed for the Resource Reports. delineation? Please share GIS and data with the Forest Service. 15 USFS / Page 8 3.1 Vegetation Resources The Forest Service recommends addition of The document will be modified to incorporate the request. February 13, western redcedar (Thuja plicata) to the list of conifer species occurring within the 2013 temperate rainforest on Revillagigedo Island. It is a major associate within the old growth forest ecosystems on this island and has potential to occur within the Project area; it has substantial ecological and economic value.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A1-2 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Item Agency / Date Assigned To Comment [some items paraphrased for brevity, see attached letter for full text] Response 16 USFS / Page 12 3.4 Plant Species Newly Documented in Alaska Populations of two SEAPA will share the locations of the two species with the USFS. Potential management February 13, plant species….that have not previously been documented in Alaska were observed. requirements and management measures will be discussed with the stakeholders and 2013 Sources checked for distribution of these species include? Please share the detail will be incorporated into the NEPA supported Resource Reports and License locations and data with the Forest Service. Being a newly documented species, are Amendment. there any management requirements or mitigation measures associated? 17 USFS / Page 12-14 3.5 General Vegetation Types Figure 23, associated with this Figures 2, 3, and 4 have been updated to show the water surface elevation at the time February 13, section, shows the original lake level which causes uncertainty whether the data of survey which was at full pool (330’). The previous figure inadvertently used the USGS 2013 produced in this section is current. This map shows young growth in the Lost Creek layer whereas others had used the Forest Service lake layer. area that may be inundated and shows forested muskeg in the inundated Track Creek area. 18 USFS / “Approximately 10.5 acres of the analysis area was mapped as forested muskeg. The text was modified as suggested. February 13, Although forested muskeg is considered a wetland type; they are not considered a 2013 wetland type as described in Section 3.7.” Consider replacing “they are not considered a wetland type as described in Section 3.7.” with “wetlands are described in Section 3.7 and do not use the category of forested muskeg.” 19 USFS / “Wetland resources in the analysis area, as described in Section 2.3.2 were mapped The text was added to the beginning of Section 3.7. February 13, using a combination of the Tongass NF wetland layers, the hydric soils layers from 2013 the Ketchikan area soil survey for the Tongass NF, and wetland boundaries delineated during field surveys of the analysis area in August 2012” Belongs as the first sentence of Section 3.7. 20 USFS / Additionally, a small percentage (approximately 2.2 percent) of the analysis area This area is based on GIS analysis and is primarily the result of resolution of map layers; includes February 13, consists of open water associated with the Swan Lake Reservoir (Table 3). It is not the area of Lost Creek within the FERC boundary. 2013 clear how the open water area was estimated. If the analysis area (between 330 and 350 foot elevation) does not include the lake, then where is this small percentage located? 21 USFS / Page 14 3.6 Invasive Plants Surveys for Invasive plants were conducted for this SEAPA agrees the additional detail requested will be necessary during the formal NEPA February 13, project in conjunction with surveys for Sensitive and Rare plants (August 6 to process. Based on agreements from the 2/27/13 stakeholder meeting, NEPA supported 2013 August 10, 2012). Results of surveys for invasive plants needs to be presented, Resource Reports will comprehensively document all information collected and including a list of the targeted species and the survey findings. consultation that has taken place in an effort to comply with stakeholder protocol. The Resource Report will include an Invasive Plant Risk Assessment which will describe the species found, risk, and appropriate BMPs. No invasive plant species were located above the dam; however, small pockets were documented and mapped below the dam. This information will be presented in more detail in the Resource Report. 22 USFS / Page 14 3.6 Invasive Plants Prevention measures for invasive plants would SEAPA agrees the additional detail requested will be necessary during the formal NEPA February 13, follow the Tongass NF protocols specified in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2000‐ process. Based on agreements from the 3/7/13 stakeholder meeting, NEPA supported 2013 National Forest Resource Management, Chapter 2080‐Noxious Weed Resource Reports will comprehensively document all information collected and Management, Tongass National Forest Supplement–R10‐TNF‐2000‐20007‐1. The consultation that has taken place in an effort to comply with stakeholder protocol. referenced Forest Service protocol requires that an Invasive Plant Risk Assessment be included in the environmental analysis of projects involving ground-disturbing activities.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A1-3 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Item Agency / Date Assigned To Comment [some items paraphrased for brevity, see attached letter for full text] Response 23 USFS / Page 14 3.7 Wetland Resources Approximately 55% or 77.4 acres of the analysis Table 4 includes all areas within the Survey Study Area, not just the area of Lost Creek February 13, area consists of wetlands. Several types of wetland communities, including forested which is NFS lands. Figure 4 does display other forested wetlands along the survey 2013 wetlands, emergent wetlands, and moss muskegs, Table 4 and Figure 4. Please boundary. check these figures. The Lost Creek area where forested wetlands are depicted are discussed elsewhere in the document (section 4.6) as 26 acres of NFS lands. How could this same area equal 61 acres indicated in the table and document. 24 USFS / Page 15 Figure 4 Muskeg classification should read “moss muskeg” to be Change made. February 13, consistent with Table 4. 2013 25 USFS / Page 17 4.1 Identified Issues and Concerns for Sensitive Plants Three sensitive SEAPA agrees with the need for a Plant Biological Evaluation. This document will February 13, plant species with potential habitat in the Swan Lake Expansion analysis area have accompany the Final License Amendment. 2013 been documented on the Ketchikan‐Misty Fiords Ranger District (edible thistle, lesser round‐leaved orchid, and Kruckeberg’s swordfern). Five sensitive plant species with potential habitat in the analysis area are suspected on the Ketchikan‐ Misty Fiords Ranger District (spatulate moonwort, mountain lady’s slipper orchid, large yellow lady’s slipper orchid, Calder’s lovage, and Alaska rein orchid) (Table 1). These eight species, and the potential project effects, are briefly described below. A Biological Evaluation, including effects determinations, will need to be completed for all known or suspected sensitive plants and should be included in the project record. See Dillman et al. (2009) in the References section. 26 USFS / Page 18 4.1.3 Mountain lady’s slipper (Cypripedium montanum Douglas ex The document has been revised accordingly. February 13, Lindl.). The subheading title does not coincide with the species description. The 2013 text in the paragraph refers to the lesser round leaved orchid (Platanthera orbiculata (Pursh) Lindl.). Please revise. 27 USFS / Page 22 4.2.3 Boreal bedstraw (Galium kamtschaticum Steller ex Schult & Comment noted. The document will be revised based upon this comment. Information February 13, Schult) Prior to field surveys in August 2012, there were no known populations of on this species will be updated in the Resource Report. 2013 borealbedstraw the Tongass National Forest. This statement is incorrect and should be omitted. The Forest Service NRIS-TESP database contains 51 Element Occurrence records for this species that pre-date August 2012. 28 USFS / Page 27 4.5 Identified Issues and Concerns for General Vegetation What are Text will be revised for consistency. In portions of the project area within state lands, it February 13, the issues and concerns and effects? is assumed that all merchantable trees within the inundation zone would be cut 2013 Page 27 4.5.1 Old-Growth Forest “It is assumed that all trees within the (stumps left intact) and removed where feasible and/or required by the Alaska inundation zone around the lake would be cut (stumps left intact) and removed Department of Natural Resources. A timber cruise will be conducted to estimate the where feasible…….No timber will be cut or removed ….on the Tongass NF.” actual amount of timber that would be cut and removed, and a logging plan would be Additional clarification is requested as statements made under subheading 4.6 developed and approved by the appropriate agency. appear to contradict this statement. The Forest Service has already indicated that the trees on NFS lands will not be cut. Clarity concerning the area around the lake, Within those areas of the Project that are within the Tongass National Forest, there will State land versus NFS lands up Lost Creek, is needed. be no timber removal. A cruise would be conducted at the appropriate time to estimate the amount of merchantable timber that could be lost, and a settlement with the US Forest Service will be concluded.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A1-4 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Item Agency / Date Assigned To Comment [some items paraphrased for brevity, see attached letter for full text] Response 29 USFS / Page 28 4.5.2 Young Growth Forests Second paragraph “Due to the lack of a Text deleted February 13, dense forested canopy…” This is contradictory to what you stated on page 12 2013 under 3.5 General Vegetation Resources. 30 USFS / Page 28 4.6 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for General SEAPA understands the likely management requirement and agrees that additional February 13, Vegetation “Avoidance of impacts to productive old-growth…would not be clarity related to the distinction between Forest Service and State lands. The report will 2013 feasible. Trees that require removal within the activity area…will follow Forest Plan be revised to further distinguish the two as follows. Standards and Guidelines as well as BMPs.” As written, this statement seems to In portions of the project area within state lands, it is assumed that all merchantable imply that the intent is to cut and remove trees from NFS land. Trees on NFS lands trees within the inundation zone would be cut (stumps left intact) and removed where will neither be cut nor removed. Applying Forest Service Standards and Guidelines feasible and/or required by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. A timber to trees on State land is inappropriate. Breaking out NFS lands and non-NFS lands cruise will be conducted to estimate the actual amount of timber that would be cut and would allow for the Forest Service to evaluate NFS lands specifically. removed, and a logging plan would be developed and approved by the appropriate agency. A management requirement would include a timber settlement agreement on the inundated timber on NFS lands. The timber settlement agreement includes a Within those areas of the Project that are within the Tongass National Forest, there will cruise, contract and payment. be no timber removal. A cruise would be conducted at the appropriate time to estimate Included in the cruise: the amount of merchantable timber that could be lost, and a settlement with the US • Acres of affected (inundated) old-growth on NFS forest land. Forest Service will be concluded. • Timber volume (gross and net) and grade, by species, within those affected acres.

Does the State have similar requirements for their timber? 31 USFS / Page 28-29 4.7 Identified Issues and Concerns to Wetland Resources Although As more information becomes available, impacts to wetlands will be refined for activities above February 13, the wetlands affected in the construction area may not be known, the inundated and below the dam. This information will be reported in a future Resource Report. Potential 2013 acres are and should be included. Ensure the acres on wetlands on NFS and State impacts will be broken out impact type, wetland type, and by land ownership. lands are differentiated. 32 USFS / Page 29 4.71 Effects from Rising Reservoir Levels within the Analysis Area Agreed. forested muskeg has been removed from the sentence. February 13, Confusion reigns when forested wetlands, emergent wetlands, moss muskegs and 2013 forested muskegs are brought up together. Do not include forested muskegs; they are included within the other wetland types as explained in Section 3.5. 33 USFS / Page 29 4.7.2 Effects from Construction Activities Outside the Analysis Area Text has been revised to clarify the intent of adding this section. As noted above, with more February 13, See Page 6 2.1 Analysis area comment information, impacts to wetlands from construction-related activities at and below the dam will 2013 be refined and addressed in more detail in a future Resource Report. No forested wetlands or moss muskegs would be directly or indirectly impacted by construction activities associated with expansion of the new dam. Figure 4 shows that only forested wetlands exist in the dam area. Either the statement is wrong or the figure is incorrect.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A1-5 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Item Agency / Date Assigned To Comment [some items paraphrased for brevity, see attached letter for full text] Response 34 Page 30 Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures for Wetland Comment noted. Quantification of acreage and associated mitigation measures will be Resources The effects of the Swan Lake Dam Expansion Project on wetlands discussed with stakeholders and addressed in upcoming NEPA supported documents would be limited to the extent possible, through the site-specific application of including the Resource Reports and the License Amendment. Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines as well as BMPs for all action alternatives. The wetlands will be inundated causing permanent loss. The use of the Forest Plan does not limit these effects.

The loss of wetlands is permanent. There are 26 acres of NFS lands permanently affected. How many of these acres are wetland? What mitigation measures are being suggested? Are there mitigation measures for State wetlands loss?

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A1-6 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Attachment 2 – Forest Service Alaska Region Sensitive Species List, May 2012

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-2. Forest Service Alaska Region Sensitive Species List, May 2012 Ranger Plant Name General Habitat District

1/

open areas open

USDA

drained

Plant

Scientific Name code Common Name well historic disturbance Human drained beach Maritime Upper beach meadow Well shrubland Tall Beach/ forest ecotone edge Forest Forest forest Open riverbank Streamside, Bog Heath meadow Dry meadow Wet Alpine and subalpine slopes Talus outcrop Rock Ultramafic Calcareous KETCHIKAN Aphragmus Eschscholtz's little APES X X eschscholtzianus nightmare Botrychium BOSP4 Spatulate moonwort X X X X S spathulatum Botrychium tunux BOTU3 Moosewort fern X X X X X Botrychium Moonwort fern, no BOYA X X X X yaaxudakeit common name Cirsium edule var. CIEDM Edible thistle X X X K macounii Cochlearia Sessileleaf COSE8 X sessilifolia scurvygrass Cypripedium Spotted lady’s slipper CYGU X X X guttatum Cypripedium Mountain lady’s CYMO2 X X X X S montanum slipper Cypripedium Large yellow lady’s parviflorum CYPAP3 X X X S slipper var. pubescens Ligusticum calderi LICA15 Calder’s loveage X X X X S

Lobaria Lichen, no common LOAM6 X K amplissima name Papaver Pale poppy PAAL5 X X X X alboroseum

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A2-1 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-2. Forest Service Alaska Region Sensitive Species List, May 2012 (continued) Ranger Plant Name General Habitat District

1/

open areas open

USDA KETCHIKAN

Plant drained

Scientific Name code Common Name well historic disturbance Human drained beach Maritime Upper beach meadow Well shrubland Tall Beach/ forest ecotone edge Forest Forest forest Open riverbank Streamside, Bog Heath meadow Dry meadow Wet Alpine and subalpine slopes Talus outcrop Rock Ultramafic Calcareous Piperia PIUN3 Alaska rein orchid X X X X X S unalascensis Platanthera Lesser round-leaved PLOR4 X X X X K orbiculata orchid Polystichum Kruckeberg’s POKR X X X K kruckebergii swordfern Romanzoffia Unalaska mist-maid ROUN X X X unalaschcensis Sidalcea Henderson’s SIHE4 X X S hendersonii checkermallow Tanacetum bipinnatum TABIH Dune tansy X S

subsp. huronense 1/ K=Known occurences S=Suspected to occur Y=Known occurences

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A2-2 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Attachment 3 – Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Abies amabilis Douglas ex J. Forbes Picea amabilis Douglas ex Loudon, Pinus amabilis Douglas Pinaceae G5 S3* Agoseris aurantiaca (Hooker) Greene var. aurantiaca Agoseris angustissima Greene, A. arachnoidea Rydberg, A. carnea Rydberg, A. Asteraceae G5T4T5 S1S2 gaspensis Fernald, A. gracilens (A. Gray) Greene, A. gracilens var. greenei (A. Gray) S. F. Blak, A. greenei (A. Gray) Rydberg, A. howellii Greene, A. lackschewitzii Douglas M. Henderson & R. K. Moseley, A. nana Rydberg, A. naskapensis J. Rousseau & Raymond, A. prionophylla Greene, A. subalpina G. N. Jones, A. vulcanica Greene, Troximon aurantiacum Hooker Agoseris glauca (Pursh) Rafinesque Agoseris altissima Rydberg, A. aspera (Rydberg) Rydberg, A. eisenhoweri B. Boivin, A. Asteraceae G5 S2S3Q glauca ssp. aspera (Rydberg) Piper, A. glauca var. aspera (Rydberg) Cronquist, A. glauca var. pumila (Nuttall) Garrett, A. glauca ssp. scorzonerifolia (Schrader) Piper, A. glauca var. villosa (Rydberg) G. L. Wittrock, A. isomeris Greene, A. lacera Greene, A. lanulosa Greene, A. lapathifolia Greene, A. leontodon Rydberg var. aspera Rydberg, A. leontodon var. pygmaea Rydberg, A. longissima Greene, A. longula Greene, A. maculata Rydberg, A. microdonta Greene, A. procera Greene, A. pubescens Rydberg, A. pumila (Nuttall) Rydberg, A. scorzonerifolia (Schrader) Greene, A. turbinata Rydberg, A. vestita Greene, A. vicinalis Greene, A. villosa Rydberg, Troximon glaucum Pursh, Troximon glaucum var. dasycephalum Torrey & A. Gray Agrostis clavata Trin. none Poaceae G4G5 S1S2 Allium victorialis L. Allium victorialis ssp. platyphyllum Hultén Liliaceae G5 S1* Alyssum obovatum (C. A. Mey.) Turcz. Alyssum americanum Greene, A. biovulatum N. Busch, A. Brassicaceae G5 S2S3 fallax Nyárády, Odontarrhena obovata C. A. Mey. Ambrosia chamissonis (Lessing) Greene Ambrosia chamissonis var. bipinnatisecta (Lessing) J. T. Howell, Franseria Asteraceae G4G5 S2 chamissonis Lessing, F. chamissonis ssp. bipinnatisecta (Lessing) Wiggins & Stockwell Antennaria densifolia A. E. Porsild Antennaria ellyae A. E. Porsild Asteraceae G3 S2 Antennaria dioica (L.) Gaertner Antennaria hyperborea D. Don, A. insularis Greene, Gnaphalium dioicum L. Asteraceae G5 S2S3 Apocynum androsaemifolium L. Apocynum ambigens Greene, A. androsaemifoliumssp. pumilum (A. Gray) B. Boivin, A. Apocynaceae G5 S3 androsaemifoliumvar. glabrum Macoun, A. androsaemifoliumvar. griseum (Greene) Bég. & Beloserky, A. androsaemifoliumvar. incanum A. DC., A. androsaemifoliumvar. intermedium Woodson, A. androsaemifoliumvar. pumilum A. Gray, A. androsaemifoliumvar. tomentellum (Greene) B. Boivin, A. androsaemifoliumvar. woodsonii B. Boivin, A. pumilum (A. Gray) Greene, A. pumilum var. rhomboideum (Greene) Bég. & Beloserky, A. scopulorum Greene ex Rydb. Arenaria longipedunculata Hultén none Caryophyllaceae G3G4Q S3S4 Arnica lonchophylla Greene ssp. lonchophylla Arnica angustifolia ssp. lonchophylla (Greene) G. W. Douglas & Ruyle-Douglas Asteraceae G4T4 S1S2 Arnica mollis Hooker none Asteraceae G5 S2Q Arnica ovata Greene Arnica diversifolia Greene, A. latifolia var. viscidula A. Gray Asteraceae G5 S3S4Q Artemisia aleutica Hultén none Asteraceae G1 S1

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-1 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Artemisia dracunculus L. Artemisia aromatic A. Nelson, A. dracunculina S. Watson, A. dracunculoides Pursh, A. Asteraceae G5 S1S2 dracunculoides ssp. dracunculina (S. Watson) H. M. Hall & Clements, A. glauca Pallas ex Willdenow, A. glauca var. megacephala B. Boivin Artemisia globularia var. lutea Hultén Artemisia globularia ssp. lutea (Hultén) L. M. Shultz Asteraceae G4TNR S2 Artemisia rupestris L. Absinthium viridifolium var. rupestre (L.) Besser, Artemisia rupestris ssp. woodii Neilson Asteraceae G3? SP Artemisia senjavinensis Bess. Ajania senjavinensis (Bess.) Poljakov, Artemisia androsacea Seem. Asteraceae G3 S3 Artemisia tanacetifolia L. Artemisia laciniata auct. non Willd., Artemisia laciniatiformis auct. non Kom. Asteraceae GNR S3 Asplenium trichomanes ssp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer none Aspleniaceae G5T5? S2S3 Astragalus agrestis Douglas ex G. Don Astragalus danicus var. dasyglottis (Fisch. ex DC.) B. Boivin, Astragalus Fabaceae G5 S1 dasyglottis Fisch. ex DC., Astragalus goniatus Nutt., Astragalus hypoglottis Hook. Astragalus robbinsii ssp. harringtonii (Rydb.) Barneby Astragalus harringtonii (Rydb.) Coville & Standl. ex Hultén, Astragalus Fabaceae G5T3 S3 robbinsii ssp. harringtonii (Rydb.) Hultén, Atelophragma harringtonii Rydb. Astragalus williamsii Rydb. none Fabaceae G4 S3 Bidens tripartita L. Bidens comosa (A. Gray) Wiegand Asteraceae G5 S1 Blysmopsis rufa (Hudson) Oteng-Yeboah Blysmus rufus (Hudson) Link, Schoenus rufus Hudson, Scirpus rufus (Hudson) Cyperaceae GNR SH* Schrader, S. rufus var. neogaeus Fernald Boechera calderi (G. A. Mulligan) Windham & Al- Arabis calderi G. A. Mulligan Brassicaceae G4? S1 Shehbaz Boechera drepanoloba (Greene) Windham & Al- Arabis drepanoloba Greene, A. drummondii var. oreophila (Rydberg) M. Hopkins, A. Brassicaceae G4? S1 Shehbaz lemmonii var. drepanoloba (Greene) Rollins, A. oreophila Rydberg Boechera lemmonii (S. Watson) W. A. Weber Arabis lemmonii S. Watson, A. bracteolata Greene, A. canescens var. latifolia S. Brassicaceae G5 S1S2 Watson, A. codyi G. A. Mulligan, A. egglestonii Rydberg, A. kennedyi Greene, A. latifolia (S. Watson) Piper, A. oreocallis Greene, A. polyclada Greene, A. semisepulta Greene Bolboschoenus maritimus ssp. paludosus (A. Nelson) Schoenoplectus maritimus (L.) Lye, Scirpus maritimus L. Cyperaceae GNRTNR S3* T. Koyama Botrychium alaskense Wagner & Grant none Ophioglossaceae G2G3 S3 Botrychium ascendens W. H. Wagner none Ophioglossaceae G2G3 S2S3 Botrychium lineare W. H. Wagner none Ophioglossaceae G2? S1 Botrychium montanum W. H. Wagner none Ophioglossacea G3 S1 Botrychium robustum Rupr. Botrychium multifidum var. robustum (Rupr.) C. Christens. Ophioglossaceae G4G5 S1S2 Botrychium spathulatum W. H. Wagner none Ophioglossaceae G3 S1 Botrychium tunux Stensvold & Farrar none Ophioglossaceae G2G3 S2 Botrychium virginianum (L.) Swartz Botrypus virginianus (L.) Holub, Botrychium virginianum var. europaeum Ångstr., B. Ophioglossaceae G5 S3 virginianum ssp. europaeum (Ångstr.) R. T. Clausen, Osmunda virginiana L Botrychium yaaxudakeit Stensvold & Farrar none Ophioglossaceae G2 S2 Brasenia schreberi J. F. Gmel. Brasenia peltata Pursh Cabombaceae G5 S1* Cardamine angulata Hook. Cardamine angulata var. alba Torrey & A. Gray, C. angulata var. hirsuta O. E. Brassicaceae G5 S1S2 Schulz, C. angulata var. pentaphylla O. E. Schulz, Dentaria grandiflora Rafinesque

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-2 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Cardamine blaisdellii Eastwood Cardamine microphylla ssp. blaisdellii (Eastwood) D. F. Murray & S. Kelso, C. Brassicaceae G3G4 S3S4 microphylla var. blaisdellii (Eastwood) Khatri Cardamine microphylla M. F. Adams Cardamine microphylla M. F. Adams aff. microphylla, Cardamine minuta Willd. ex. DC. Brassicaceae G3G4 S2 Cardamine pensylvanica Muhl. ex Willd. Cardamine flexuosa ssp. pensylvanica (Muhl. ex Willd.) O. E. Schulz, C. Brassicaceae G5 S1 hirsuta var. pensylvanica (Muhl. ex Willd.) P. W. Graff, C. multifolia Rydberg, C. pensylvanica var. brittoniana Farwell, C. rotundifolia var. diversifolia O. E. Schulz, Dracamine pensylvanica (Muhl. ex Willd.) Nieuwland Carex adelostoma V. I. Krecz. Carex buxbaumii var. alpicola Hartman, C. buxbaumii var. alpina Hartman, C. Cyperaceae G4 S1S2* buxbaumii var. mutica Hartman, C. buxbaumii ssp. mutica (Hartman) Isoviita, C. morrisseyi A. E. Porsild Carex atherodes Spreng. none Cyperaceae G5 S3S4* Carex athrostachya Olney none Cyperaceae G5 S1* Carex atratiformis Britt. C. atrata L. ssp. atratiformis (Britt.) Kükenthal, C. atratiformis ssp. raymondii (Calder) A. Cyperaceae G5 S3* E. Porsild, C. ovata Rudge, C. raymondii Calder Carex bebbii Olney ex Fernald Carex tribuloides var. bebbii L. H. Bailey Cyperaceae G5 S1S2* Carex brunnescens ssp. alaskana Kalela none Cyperaceae G5T3T4 SU* Carex deflexa Hornem. var. deflexa Carex deflexa var. deanii L. H. Bailey Cyperaceae G5 S2S3* Carex deweyana Schwein. var. deweyana none Cyperaceae G5 S2S3* Carex eburnea Boott none Cyperaceae G5 S3* Carex echinata Murray ssp. echinata Carex angustior Mack., C. angustior var. gracilenta R. T. Clausen & Wahl, C. Cyperaceae G5T5 S1S2* cephalantha (L. H. Bailey) E. P. Bicknell, C. echinata var. angustata (Carey) Bailey, C. hawaiiensis H. St. John, C. josselynii (Fern.) Mack. ex Pease, C. laricina Mack. ex Bright, C. leersii Willd., C. muricata var. angustata (Carey) Carey ex Gleason, C. muricata var. cephalantha (Bailey) Wieg. & Eames, C. muricata var. laricina (Mack. ex Bright) Gleason, C. ormantha (Fern.) Mack., C. phyllomanica var. angustata (Carey) Boivin, C. phyllomanica var. ormantha (Fern.) Boivin, C. stellulata, C. svensonis Skottsb. Carex glareosa ssp. pribylovensis (Macoun) G. Carex lagopina var. pribylovensis (Macoun) Kükenthal, C. pribylovensis Macoun Cyperaceae G4G5T2T3 S2* Halliday & Chater Carex heleonastes Ehrh. ex L. f. Carex carltonia Dewey, C. curta var. robustior (Kük.) B. Boivin, C. heleonastes L. Cyperaceae G4 S3* f. ssp. heleonastes, C. heleonastes ssp. neurochlaena (T. Holm) Böcher, C. neurochlaena T. Holm Carex hoodii Boott none Cyperaceae G5 S1* Carex interior L. H. Bailey Carex interior ssp. charlestonensis Clokey, C. interior ssp. keweenawensis F. J. Herm. Cyperaceae G5 S3* Carex lapponica O. Lang Carex canescens var. subloliacea Laestadius Cyperaceae G4G5Q S3S4* Carex laxa Wahlenberg none Cyperaceae G5? S1S2* Carex leptalea ssp. pacifica Calder & R. L. Taylor Carex jimcalderi B. Boivin Cyperaceae G5T4T5 SU* Carex parryana Dewey Carex arctica Dewey, C. parryana ssp. hallii (Olney) D. F. Murray, C. Cyperaceae G4 S2* parryana ssp. idahoa (L. H. Bailey) D. F. Murray, C. parryana var. brevisquama F. J. Herm., C. parryana var. hallii (Olney) Kük., C. parryana Dewey var. parryana, C. parryana var. unica L. H. Bailey

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-3 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Carex peckii Howe Carex clivicola Fernald & Weatherby, C. nigromarginata var. elliptica (Boott) Cyperaceae G4G5 S2* Gleason, C. nigromarginata var. minor (Boott) Gleason Carex phaeocephala Piper none Cyperaceae G4 S3* Carex praegracilis W. Boott Carex camporum Mack. Cyperaceae G4 SP* Carex preslii Steud. none Cyperaceae G4 S1* Carex sabulosa ssp. leiophylla (Mack.) A. E. Porsild Carex leiophylla Mack Cyperaceae G5 SP* Carex sartwellii Dewey Carex sartwellii Dewey var. sartwellii, C. sartwellii var. stenorrhyncha F. J. Herm. Cyperaceae G4G5 SP* Carex sprengelii Dewey ex Spreng. Carex longirostris Torrey Cyperaceae G5? S1* Carex stipata Muhl. ex Willd. var. stipata Carex stipata var. crassicurta Peck, C. stipata var. subsecuta Peck Cyperaceae G5 S2* Carex sychnocephala J. Carey none Cyperaceae G4 S2* Carex tahoensis Smiley Carex eastwoodiana Stacey Cyperaceae G3G4Q S1* Carex xerantica L. H. Bailey none Cyperaceae G5 S1* Castilleja hyetophila Pennell none Orobanchaceae G4G5 S2S3* Castilleja miniata ssp. dixonii (Fernald) Kartesz Castilleja dixonii Fernald, Castilleja miniata var. dixonii (Fernald) A. Neslon & J. F. Orobanchaceae G5TNR SU* Macbr. Catabrosa aquatica (L.) P. Beauv. Aira aquatica L. Poaceae G5 S1S2 Cerastium aleuticum Hultén Cerastium beeringianum var. aleuticum (Hultén) S. L. Welsh Caryophyllaceae G3 S3 Ceratophyllum demersum L. Ceratophyllum apiculatum Cham., C. demersum var. apiculatum (Cham.) Aschers., C. Ceratophyllaceae G5 S3S4 demersum var. apiculatum (Cham.) Garcke Chamaerhodos erecta (L.) Bunge Chamaerhodos erecta var. nuttallii Pickering ex Rydb., C. erecta var. parviflora (Nutt.) Rosaceae G5 S2S3* C. L. Hitchc., C. nuttallii Pickering ex Rydb., C. nuttallii var. keweenawensis Fern., Sibbaldia erecta L. Chenopodium glaucum var. salinum (Standley) B. Chenopodium glaucum (Standley) Aellen, C. salinum Standley Chenopodiaceae G5T5 S3S4 Boivin Chimaphila umbellata (L.) W. P. C. Chimaphila acuta Rydb., C. occidentalis Rydb., C. umbellata ssp. acuta (Rydb.) Ericaceae G5T5 S2* Barton ssp. umbellata Hultén, C. umbellata var. acuta (Rydb.) S. F. Blake, C. umbellata ssp. cisatlantica (S. F. Blake) Hultén, C. umbellata var. cisatlantica S. F. Blake, C. umbellata ssp. occidentalis (Rydb.) Hultén, C. umbellata var. occidentalis (Rydb.) S. F. Blake Chrysosplenium rosendahlii Packer Chrysosplenium alternifolium var. rosendahlii (Packer) B. Boivin Saxifragaceae G4G5Q S1S2* Cicuta bulbifera L. none Apiaceae G5 S3 Cirsium edule var. macounii (Greene) D. J. Keil Carduus macounii Greene, Cirsium macounii (Greene) Petrak Asteraceae G4TNR SU Cirsium kamtschaticum Ledeb. ex DC. none Asteraceae G3? S2 Claytonia arctica Adams none Portulacaceae G3 S1S2 Claytonia ogilviensis McNeill none Portulaceae G1 SP Cochlearia sessilifolia Rollins Cochlearia officinalis var. sessilifolia (Rollins) Hultén Brassicaceae G1G2Q S2Q Corispermum ochotense Ignatov Corispermum ochotense var. alaskanum Mosyakin, C. ochotense Ignatov Chenopodiaceae G3G4 S3 var. ochotense

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-4 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Crassula aquatica (L.) Schönland Bulliarda aquatica (L.) DC., Crassula saginoides (Maximowicz) M. Bywater & Crassulaceae G5 S1S2 Wickens, Hydrophila aquatica (L.) House, Tillaea angustifolia Nutt., T. aquatica L., T. ascendens Eat., Tillaeastrum aquaticum (L.) Britt. Crataegus suksdorfii (Sarge) Kruschke Crataegus douglasii var. suksdorfii Sarg. Rosaceae GNR SH* Cryptantha shackletteana L. C. Higgins Cryptantha shacklettiana L. C. Higgins Boraginaceae G1Q S1 Cryptogramma stelleri (S. G. Gmel.) Prantl Pteris stelleri S.G. Gmel. Pteridaceae G5 S3S4 Cypripedium montanum Douglas ex Lindl. none Orchidaceae G4 S2* Cypripedium parviflorum var. exiliens Sheviak none Orchidaceae G5 S2S3* Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens (Willd.) Cypripedium calceolus var. planipetalum (Fernald) Victorin & J. Rousseau, C. Orchidaceae G5TNR S1* Knight calceolus var. pubescens (Willd.) Correll, C. flavescens DC., C. parviflorum var. planipetalum Fernald, C. pubescens Willd., C. veganum Cockerell, P. Barker & M. Barker Cypripedium yatabeanum Makino Cypripedium guttatum ssp. yatabeanum (Makino) Hultén, C. Orchidaceae GNR S1* guttatum var. yatabeanum (Makino) Pfitzer Cypripedium x alaskanum P. M. Brown none Orchidaceae GNR S1S2* Danthonia spicata (L.) P. Beauv. ex Roem. & Schult. Avena spicata L. Poaceae G5 S1 Douglasia arctica Hook. Douglasia nivalis var. glabra Duby Primulaceae G3 S3* Douglasia beringensis S. Kelso, Jurtzev, & D. F. Murray Androsace beringensis (S. Kelso, Jurtzev, & D. F. Murray) Cubey Primulaceae G2 S2 Douglasia laevigata A. Gray Androsace laevigata (A. Gray) Wendelbo, Doulgasia Primulaceae G3 SP* laevigata ssp. ciliolata (Constance) Calder & Roy L. Taylor, D. laevigata var. ciliolata Constance Draba aleutica Ekman Draba behringii Tolmatchev Brassicaceae G2 S2 Draba chamissonis G. Don Draba frigida var. kamtschatica Ledeb., D. kamtschatica (Ledeb.) N. Busch, D. Brassicaceae GNR S1Q lonchocarpa ssp. kamtschatica (Ledeb.) Calder & R. L. Taylor, D. nivalis var. kamtschatica (Ledeb.) Pohle Draba densifolia Nuttall Draba caeruleomontana Payson & H. St. John, D. caeruleomontana var. piperi Payson Brassicaceae G5 S2S3Q & H. St. John, D. glacialis var. pectinata S. Watson, D. globosa var. sphaerula (J. F. Macbride & Payson) O. E. Schulz, D. mulfordiae Payson, D. nelsonii J. F. Macbride & Payson, D. oligosperma var. pectinata (S. Watson) Jepson, D. pectinata (S. Watson) Rydberg, D. sphaerula J. F. Macbride & Payson Draba incerta Payson Draba exalata E. Ekman, D. incerta var. laevicapsula (Payson) Payson & H. St. Brassicaceae G5 S3 John, D. incerta var. peasei (Fernald) Rollins, D. laevicapsula Payson, D. peasei Fernald Draba macounii O. E. Schulz none Brassicaceae G3G4 S3 Draba micropetala Hook. Draba adamsii auct. non Ledeb., Draba alpina var. micropetala Durand, Draba Brassicaceae GNR S1S2 oblongata auct. non R. Brown ex DC., D. oblongata ssp. minuta V. V. Petrovsky, D. pauciflora var. micropetala (Hooker) O. E. Schulz Draba mulliganii Al-Shehbaz none Brassicaceae GNR S3 Draba murrayi G. A. Mulligan none Brassicaceae G2 S2S3 Draba ogilviensis Hultén none Brassicaceae G3 S1

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-5 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Draba pauciflora R. Brown Draba adamsii Ledeb., D. micropetala auct. non Hook., D. oblongata auct. non R. Brassicaceae G4 S2 Brown ex DC. Draba praealta Greene Draba cascadensis Payson & H. St. John, D. columbiana Rydberg, D. dolichopoda O. Brassicaceae G5 S1Q E. Schulz, D. lapilutea A. Nelson, D. lonchocarpa var. dasycarpa O. E. Schulz, D. praealta var. yellowstonensis (A. Nelson) O. E. Schulz, D. yellowstonensis A. Nelson Draba subcapitata Simmons none Brassicaceae G4 S1S2 Draba yukonensis A. E. Porsild none Brassicaceae G1 SP Eleocharis nitida Fernald none Cyperaceae G3G4 S1S2* Eleocharis Eleocharis pauciflora var. fernaldii Svenson Cyperaceae G5 S2* quinqueflora ssp. fernaldii (Svenson) Hultén Elymus lanceolatus ssp. psammophilus (J. M. Gillett & Agropyron dasystachyum var. psammophilum (J. M. Gillett & H. Senn) E. G. Voss, A. Poaceae G3G4 S1S2 H. Senn) A. Löve psammophilum J. M. Gillett & H. Senn, A. psammophilum f. aristatum J. M. Gillett & H. Senn, Elymus calderi Barkworth, Elytrigia dasystachya var. psammophila (J. M. Gillett & H. Senn) Cronquist, E. dasystachya ssp. psammophila (J. M. Gillett & H. Senn) D. R. Dewey Erigeron acris ssp. kamtschaticus (DC.) H. Hara Erigeron kamtschaticus DC., Erigeron acris var. kamtschaticus (DC.) Herder Asteraceae G5T4T5 SP Erigeron muirii A. Gray Erigeron grandiflorus ssp. muirii (A. Gray) Hultén Asteraceae G2 S2S3 Erigeron ochroleucus Nutt. Erigeron laetevirens Rydberg, E. montanus Rydberg, E. Asteraceae G5 S1S2 ochroleucus var. scribneri (Canby ex Rydberg) Cronquist, E. scribneri Canby ex Rydberg, E. tweedyanus Canby & Rose Erigeron porsildii G. L. Nesom & D. F. Murray Erigeron grandiflorus ssp. arcticus A. E. Porsild, not E. arcticus Rouy Asteraceae G3G4 S3S4 Erigeron yukonensis Rydberg Erigeron glabellus var. yukonensis (Rydberg.) Hultén Asteraceae G2G4 SU Eriogonum flavum var. aquilinum Reveal none Polygonaceae G5T2 S2 Eriophorum viridicarinatum (Engelm.) Fernald Eriophorum latifolium var. viridicarinatum Engelm. Cyperaceae G5 S2S3* Erysimum capitatum var. purshii (Durand) Rollins Erysimum asperum var. purshii Durand, Cheiranthus alpestris (Cockerell) A. Heller, C. Brassicaceae G5T1 S2 argillosus Greene, C. aridus A. Nelson, C. asperrimus Greene, C. bakeri Greene, C. nivalis Greene, C. nivalis var. amoenus Greene, C. oblanceolatus (Rydberg) A. Heller, C. radicatus (Rydberg) A. Heller, Cheirinia amoena (Greene) Rydberg, C. argillosa (Greene) Rydberg, C. arida (A. Nelson) Rydberg, C. asperrima (Greene) Rydberg, C. bakeri (Greene) Rydberg, C. brachycarpa Rydberg, C. cockerelliana (Daniels) Cockerell, C. desertorum Wooton & Standley, C. nivalis (Greene) Rydberg, C. nivalis var. radicata (Rydberg) Cockerell, C. oblanceolata (Rydberg) Rydberg, C. radicata (Rydberg) Rydberg, E. amoenum (Greene) Rydberg, E. angustatum Rydberg, E. argillosum (Greene) Rydberg, E. aridum (A. Nelson) A. Nelson, E. asperrimum (Greene) Rydberg, E. asperum var. amoenum (Greene) Reveal, E. asperum var. angustatum (Rydberg) B. Boivin, E. asperum var. pumilum S. Watson, E. bakeri (Greene) Rydberg, E. capitatum var. amoenum (Greene) R. J. Davis, E. capitatum var. argillosum (Greene) R. J. Davis, E. capitatum var. nivale (Greene) N. H. Holmgren, E. cockerellianum Daniels, E. desertorum (Wooton & Standley) Rossbach, E. nivale (Greene) Rydberg, E. oblanceolatum Rydberg, E. radicatum Rydberg Festuca edlundiae S. Aiken, Consaul, & Lefkovich none Poaceae G3G4 S1

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-6 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Festuca minutiflora Rydb. Festuca brachyphylla var. endotera (St. Yves) Litard., Festuca Poaceae G5 S1 ovina var. minutiflora (Rydb.) J. T. Howell. Festuca occidentalis Hook. Festuca ovina var. polyphylla Vasey ex Beal Poaceae G5 S1 Festuca viviparoidea Krajina ex Festuca vivipara ssp. glabra Fred. Poaceae G4G5T4T5 SU Pavlick ssp. viviparoidea Festuca viviparoidea ssp. krajinae Pavlick Festuca vivipara ssp. glabra Fred. Poaceae G4G5TNR SU Gaultheria pyroloides Hook. & Thomson ex Miquel Gaultheria miqueliana Takeda Ericaceae G3G4 S1* Gentianella auriculata (Pall.) J. M. Gillett none Gentianaceae G4G5 S1* Gentianella propinqua ssp. aleutica (Cham. & Schltdl.) Gentiana aleutica Cham. & Schltdl., Gentianella propinqua var. aleutica (Cham. & Gentianaceae G5T2T4 S3* J. M. Gillett Schltdl.) S. L. Welsh Gentianopsis barbata (Froel.) Ma ssp. barbata Gentianella detonsa ssp. yukonensis J. M. Gillett, Gentianopsis Gentianaceae GNR S3Q detonsa ssp. yukonensis (J. M. Gillett) J. M. Gillett Gentianopsis richardsonii (A. E. Porsild) Gentiana richardsonii A. E. Porsild Gentianaceae GNR S1S2 Geum aleppicum ssp. strictum (Aiton) R. T. Clausen Geum decurrens Rydb., G. strictum Aiton, G. strictum var. decurrens (Rydb.) Kearney Rosaceae G5T5 S3* & Peebles Geum schofieldii Calder & R. L. Taylor none Rosaceae GNR SPQ* Geum x macranthum (Kearney) B. Boivin Acomastylis macrantha (Kearney) Bolle, Sieversia x macrantha Rosaceae GNA S1 Glehnia littoralis ssp. leiocarpa (Math.) Hult. Glehnia leiocarpa Math. Apiaceae G5T5 S2S3 Glyceria leptostachya Buckley Glyceria davyi (Merr.) Tzelev, Panicularia davyi Merr., P. leptostachya (Buckley) Piper Poaceae G3 S3 Glyceria pulchella (Nash.) K. Schum. Panicularia pulchella Nash Poaceae G5 S3S4 Glyceria striata (Lam.) Hitchc. Glyceria elata (Nash ex Rydb.) M. E. Jones, G. nervata (Willd.) Trin., G. Poaceae G5 S3 striata ssp. stricta (Scribn.) Hultén, G. striata var. stricta (Scribn.) Fernald, Panicularia nervata (Willd.) Kuntze, P. striata (Lam.) Hitchc. Isoetes occidentalis L. F. Hend. Isoetes flettii (A. A. Eaton) N. E. Pfeiffer, Isoetes lacustris ssp. paupercula (Engelm.) J. Isoetaceae G4G5 S3S4* Feilberg, Isoetes lacustris var. paupercula Engelm., Isoetes paupercula (Engelm.) A. A. Eaton, Isoetes piperi A. A. Eaton Isolepis cernua (Vahl) Roem. & Schult. var. cernua Scirpus cernuus Vahl, S. cernuus ssp. californicus (Torr.) Thorne, S. Cyperaceae G5 S1* cernuus var. californicus (Torr.) Beetle Juncus articulatus L. Juncus articulatus var. obtusatus Engelm., J. articulatus var. stolonifer (Wohlleben) Juncaceae G5 S1S2* House, J. lampocarpus Ehrhart ex Hoffmann Juncus nodosus L. Juncus nodosus var. meridionalis F. J. Hermann, J. rostkovii E. Meyer Juncaceae G5 S1S2* Juncus tenuis Willd. Juncus bicornis Michaux, J. bicornis var. williamsii (Fernald) Victorin, J. macer Gray, J. Juncaceae G5 S2* macer f. williamsii (Fernald) F. J. Hermann, J. macer var. williamsii (Fernald) Fernald, J. tenuis var. bicornis (Michaux) E. Meyer, J. tenuis var. multicornis E. Meyer, J. tenuis var. williamsii Fernald Juniperus horizontalis Moench Juniperus horizontalis var. douglasii hort., J. horizontalis var. variegata Beissner Cupressaceae G5 S3 Koeleria asiatica Domin Koeleria cairnesiana Hultén Poaceae G4 S3 Koeleria macrantha (Ledeb.) Schult. Koeleria cristata var. longifolia Vasey ex Burtt Davy, K. Poaceae G5 S1 cristata var. pinetorum Abrams, K. gracilis Pers., K. nitida Nutt., K. yukonensis Hultén Lactuca biennis (Moench) Fernald Sonchus biennis Moench Asteraceae G5 S2S3

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-7 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Lathyrus ochroleucus Hook. none Fabaceae G5 SH Lewisia pygmaea (A. Gray) B. L. Robinson Talinum pygmaeum A. Gray, Calandrinia grayi Britt., C. pygmaea (A. Gray) A. Portulacaceae G5 SP Gray, Lewisia exarticulata H. St. John, L. glandulosa (Rydb.) Clay, L. minima (A. Nelson) A. Nelson, L. pygmaea var. aridorum Bartlett, L. pygmaea ssp. glandulosa (Rydb.) Ferris, L. sierrae Ferris, Oreobroma aridorum (Bartlett) A. Heller, O. exarticulatum (H. St. John) Rydb., O. glandulosum Rydb., O. grayi (Britt.) Rydb., O. minimum A. Nelson, O. pygmaeum (A. Gray) Howell Ligusticum calderi Math. & Const. none Apiaceae G3G4 S2 Limosella aquatica L. none Plantaginaceae G5 S3 Lobelia dortmanna L. none Campanulaceae G4G5 S1S2 Lonicera involucrata (Richardson) Banks none Caprifoliaceae G4G5 S3 Lupinus kuschei Eastwood Lupinus sericeus var. kuschei (Eastwood) Boivin Fabaceae G3G4 S2 Luzula comosa E. Meyer Luzula campestris var. comosa (E. Meyer) Fernald & Wiegand, L. Juncaceae G4G5 S1* campestris var. columbiana H. St. John, L. campestris var. macrantha (S. Watson) Fernald & Wiegand, L. comosa var. congesta (Thuillier) S. Watson, L. comosa var. laxa Buchenau, L. comosa var. macrantha S. Watson, L. comosa var. subsessilis S. Watson, L. intermedia (Thuillier) A. Nelson, L. multiflora ssp. comosa (E. Meyer) Hultén, L. multiflora ssp. congesta (Thuillier) Hylander, L. subsessilis Buchenau Lycopodiella inundata (L.) Holub. Lepidotis inundata (L.) Börner, Lycopodium inundatum L. Lycopodiaceae G5 S3* Lycopus asper Greene Lycopus lucidus ssp. americanus (A. Gray) Hultén, L. lucidus var. americanus A. Gray Lamiaceae G5 S1* Lycopus uniflorus Michx. none Lamiaceae G5 S3S4* Maianthemum racemosum ssp. amplexicaule (Nutt.) Maianthemum amplexicaule (Nutt.) W. A. Weber, M. Liliaceae G5 S1* LaFrankie racemosum var. amplexicaule (Nutt.) Dorn, Smilacina amplexicaulis Nutt., S. amplexicaulis var. glabra J. F. Macbr., S. amplexicaulis var. jenkinsii Boivin, S. amplexicaulis var. ovata Boivin, S. racemosa var. amplexicaulis (Nutt.) S. Watson, S. racemosa var. brachystyla G. Henderson, S. racemosa var. glabra (J. F. Macbr.) St. John, S. racemosa var. jenkinsii (Boivin) Boivin, Unifolium amplexicaule (Nutt.) Greene, Vagnera amplexicaulis (Nutt.) Greene, V. amplexicaulis var. glabra (J. F. Macbr.) Abrams, V. pallescens Greene Maianthemum stellatum (L.) Link Convallaria stellata L., Smilacina liliacea (Greene) Wynd, S. sessilifolia Nutt. ex Liliaceae G5 S3* Baker, S. stellata (L.) Desf., S. stellata var. crassa Victorin, S. stellata var. mollis Farw., S. stellata var. sessilifolia (Nutt. ex Baker) G. Hend., S. stellata var. sylvatica Victorin & Rouss., Unifolium liliaceum Greene, U. sessilifolium (Nutt. ex Baker) Greene, U. stellatum (L.) Greene, Vagnera liliacea (Greene) Rydb., V. sessilifolia (Nutt. ex Baker) Greene, V. stellata (L.) Morong Malaxis monophyllos (L.) Swartz ssp. monophyllos Malaxis diphyllos Cham., M. monophyllos var. diphyllos (Cham.) Luer Orchidaceae GNRTNR SU* Malaxis monophyllos ssp. brachypoda (A. Gray) F. Malaxis brachypoda (A. Gray) Fernald, Microstylis brachypoda A. Gray Orchidaceae GNRTNR SU* Morris & E. A. Eames Melica subulata (Griseb.) Scribn. Bromelica subulata (Griseb.) Farw., Bromus subulata Griseb., Festuca acerosa Trin. ex Poaceae G5 S2S3 A. Gray, Melica acuminata Bol., Melica poaeoides var. acuminata Bol.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-8 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Mertensia drummondii (Lehm.) G. Don Lithospermum drummondii Lehm. Boraginaceae G2G3 S2 Mertensia paniculata var. alaskana (Britton) L. O. none Boraginaceae G5TNR Pending Williams Micranthes charlottae (Calder & Savile) Saxifraga nelsoniana ssp. carlottae (Calder & Savile) Hultén, S. Saxifragaceae GNR S2* nelsoniana ssp. charlottae (Calder & Savile) Hultén, S. punctata ssp. carlottae Calder & Savile, S. punctata ssp. charlottae Calder & Savile Micranthes nelsoniana ssp. insularis (Hultén) Elven & Micranthes nelsoniana var. insularis (Hultén) Gornall & H. Ohba, Saxifraga Saxifragaceae GNRTNR S2* D. F. Murray insularis (Hultén) Sipliv., S. nelsoniana ssp. insularis (Hultén) Hultén, S. punctata ssp. insularis Hultén, S. punctata var. insularis (Hultén) B. Boivin Micranthes nudicaulis (D. Don) Gornall & H. Ocrearia nudicaulis (D. Don) Small, Saxifraga nudicaulis D. Don Saxifragaceae G3G4Q S3* Ohba ssp. nudicaulis Micranthes occidentalis (S. Watson) Small Saxifraga allenii (Small) Fedde, Saxifraga occidentalis S. Watson, S. Saxifragaceae G5 S1* occidentalis var. allenii (Small) C. L. Hitchcock, S. occidentalis var. wallowensis M. Peck, S. reflexa ssp. occidentalis (S. Watson) Hultén, S. saximontana E. E. Nelson Micranthes porsildiana (Calder & Savile) Elven & D. F. Micranthes nelsoniana var. porsildiana (Calder & Savile) Gornall & H. Ohba, Saxifraga Saxifragaceae G4 S2* Murray nelsoniana ssp. porsildiana (Calder & Savile) Hultén, S. porsildiana (Calder & Savile) Jurtz. & V. V. Petrovsky, S. punctata ssp. porsildiana Calder & Savile Micranthes tolmiei (Torr. & A. Gray) Brouillet & Gornall Saxifraga tolmiei Torr. & A. Gray, S. tolmiei var. ledifolia (Greene) Engl. & Irmsch. Saxifragaceae GNR S2S3* Mimulus lewisii Pursh none Phrymaceae G5 S2S3* Minuartia dawsonensis (Britt.) House Alsinopsis dawsonensis (Britt.) Rydb., Alsinanthe stricta ssp. dawsonensis (Britt.) Á. Caryophyllaceae G5 S3S4* Löve & D. Löve, Arenaria dawsonensis Britt., A. litorea Fernald, A. stricta var. dawsonensis (Britt.) Scoggan, A. stricta ssp. dawsonensis (Britt.) Maguire, A. stricta var. litorea (Fernald) B. Boivin, Minuartia litorea (Fernald) House, Sabulina dawsonensis (Britt.) Rydb. Mitella nuda L. Mitella prostrata Michaux Saxifragaceae G5 S1* Montia vassilievii (Kuzen.) McNeill ssp. vassilievii Claytonia bostockii A. E. Porsild, C. vassilievii Kuzen., Claytoniella bostockii (A.E. Portulacaceae GNRTNR S3Q Porsild) Jurtzev, C. vassilievii (Kuzen.) Jurtz., Montia bostockii (A. E. Porsild) S. L. Welsh, Montiastrum bostockii (A. E. Porsild) Ö. Nilsson, M. vassilievii (Kuzen.) Ö. Nilsson Myriophyllum farwellii Morong none Haloragaceae G5 S1* Najas flexilis (Willd.) Rostk. & W. L. E. Schmidt Caulinia flexilis Willd., Najas caespitosa (Maguire) Reveal, N. caespitosus (Maguire) Najadaceae G5 S3* Reveal, N. canadensis Michaux, N. flexilis ssp. caespitosa Maguire, N. flexilis var. congesta Farw., N. flexilis var. robusta Morong Orobanche fasciculata Nutt. Anoplanthus fasciculatus (Nutt.) Walp., Aphyllon fasciculatum (Nutt.) Torr. & A. Orobanchaceae G4 S1* Gray, Orobanche fasciculata var. franciscana Achey, O. fasciculata var. lutea (Parry) Achey, O. fasciculata var. subulata Goodman, Orobanche fasciculata var. typica Achey, Thalesia fasciculata (Nutt.) Britton, Thalesia lutea (Parry) Rydb.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-9 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Orobanche uniflora L. Aphyllon uniflorum (L.) Torr. & A. Gray, Orobanche porphyrantha G. Beck, O. Orobanchaceae G5 S1S2* purpurea Jacq., O. sedii (Suksd.) Fech., O. terrae-novae Fern., O. uniflora ssp. occidentalis (Greene) Abrams ex Ferris, O. uniflora var. minuta (Suksd.) G. Beck, O. uniflora var. occidentalis (Greene) Roy L. Taylor & MacBryde, O. uniflora var. purpurea (A. Heller) Achey, O. uniflora var. sedii (Suksdorf) Achey, O. uniflora var. terrae-novae (Fern.) Munz, O. uniflora var. typica Achey, Thalesia uniflora (L.) Britt. Oxygraphis glacialis (Fisch.) Bunge Ficaria glacialis Fisch., Ranunculus kamchaticus DC. Ranunculaceae G4G5 S3 Oxytropis arctica var. barnebyana S. L. Welsh Oxytropis sordida var. barnebyana (S. L. Welsh) Jurtzev Fabaceae G4?T2Q SU Oxytropis kobukensis S. L. Welsh none Fabaceae G2 S2 Oxytropis kokrinensis A. E. Porsild none Fabaceae G3 S3 Oxytropis tananensis Jurtzev Oxytropis campestris var. varians (Rydb.) Barneby Fabaceae GNR S3S4Q Packera subnuda var. moresbiensis Calder & R. L. Packera moresbiensis (Calder & R. L. Taylor) J. F. Bain, S. Asteraceae GNRT3T4 S3 Taylor) Trock cymbalarioides var. moresbiensis (Calder & R. L. Taylor) C. C. Freeman, Senecio cymbalarioides ssp. moresbiensis Calder & R. L. Taylor, S. moresbiensis (Calder & R. L. Taylor) G. W. Douglas & Ruyle-Douglas, S. resedifolius var. moresbiensis (Calder & R. L. Taylor) B. Boivin Papaver gorodkovii Tolmatchew & Petrovsky none Papaveraceae G3 S2S3 Parasenecio auriculatus (DC.) J. R. Grant Cacalia auriculata DC., Koyamacalia auriculata (DC.) H. Robinson & Brettell Asteraceae G4? S2 Parrya nauruaq Al-Shehbaz, J. R. Grant, R. Lipkin, D. F. none Brassicaceae G2 S1S2 Murray, & C. L. Parker Pedicularis groenlandica Retz. Elephantella groenlandica (Retz.) Rydb., P. groenlandica ssp. surrecta (Benth.) Orobanchaceae G5 S2* Piper, P. groenlandica var. surrecta (Benth.) A. Gray Pedicularis hirsuta L. none Orobanchaceae G5? S1* Penstemon serrulatus Menzies ex Rees none Plantaginaceae G4 S1 Phacelia franklinii (R. Br.) A. Gray none Hydrophyllaceae G5 SP Phacelia mollis J. F. Macbr. none Hydrophyllaceae G2G3 S3 Phacelia sericea (Graham) A. Gray Phacelia sericea (Graham) A. Gray ssp. sericea Hydrophyllaceae G5 S2 Phippsia concinna (Th. Fr.) Lindeb. Catabrosa concinna Th. Fr., C. concinna ssp. algidiformis Harry Sm., Phippsia Poaceae G4 SP algida ssp. concinna (Th. Fr.) Á. Löve & D. Löve, P. algida ssp. algidiformis (Harry Sm.) Á. Löve & D. Löve, P. algidiformis (Harry Sm.) Tzvelev Phlox hoodii Richardson Phlox richardsonii Hook., P. sibirica ssp. richardsonii (Hook.) Hultén Polemoniaceae G5 S3Q* Phyllodoce empetriformis (Sm.) D. Don Menziesia empetriformis Sm. Ericaceae G5 S1S2* Phyllospadix serrulatus Rupr. ex Asch. none Potamogetonaceae G4 S3* Physaria calderi (G. A. Mulligan & A. E. Porsild) O'Kane Lesquerella calderi G. A. Mulligan & A. E. Porsild, L. arctica ssp. calderi (G. A. Mulligan Brassicaceae G3G4 S2 & Al-Shehbaz & A. E. Porsild) Hultén Physocarpus capitatus (Pursh) Kuntze Physocarpus opulifolius var. tomentellus (Ser.) B. Boivin, Spiraea capitata Pursh Rosaceae G5 S2* Picris hieracioides L. Picris hieracioides var. alpina Koidzumi, P. hieracioides ssp. kamtschatica (Ledeb.) Asteraceae G5 S1 Hultén

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-10 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm. ex S. Watson Pinus contorta ssp. latifolia (Engelm.) Critchfield, Pinus Pinaceae G5T5 SU* divaricata var. hendersonii (Lemmon) B. Boivin, Pinus divaricata var. latifolia (Engelm. ex S. Watson) B. Boivin Piperia unalascensis (Spreng.) Rydb. Habenaria schischmareffiana Cham., H. unalaschensis (Spreng.) Orchidaceae G5 S3* S. Watson, Platanthera cooperi (S. Watson) Rydb., P. foetida Geyer ex Hook., P. unalaschcensis (Spreng.) Kurtz, Spiranthes unalascensis Spreng. Plagiobothrys orientalis (L.) I. M. Johnst. none Boraginaceae G3G4 S3 Platanthera orbiculata (Pursh) Lindl. Habenaria orbiculata (Pursh) Torr., H. orbiculata var. lehorsii Fernald, H. Orchidaceae G5 S3S4* orbiculata var. menziesii (Lindl.) Fernald, Lysias orbiculata (Pursh) Rydb., Orchis orbiculata Pursh, Platanthera orbiculata var. lehorsii (Fernald) Catling Platanthera tipuloides var. behringiana (Rydb.) Hultén Habenaria behringiana (Rydb.) Ames, Limnorchis behringiana Rydb. Orchidaceae G4G5T2? S1S2* Pleuropogon sabinei R. Br. none Poaceae G4G5 S1S2 Poa hartzii ssp. alaskana Poa alaskana (Soreng) Tzvelev Poaceae G3G4T1T2 S1S2 Poa macrantha Vasey Melica macrantha (Vasey) Beal, Poa douglasii ssp. macrantha (Vasey) D. D. Keck, P. Poaceae G5 S1S2 douglasii var. macrantha (Vasey) B. Boivin Poa porsildii Gjærev. none Poaceae G3 S2S3 Poa secunda J. Presl ssp. secunda Poaceae G5TNR S1S2 Poa secunda ssp. juncifolia (Scribn.) Soreng Poaceae G5TNR SP Podagrostis humilis (Vasey) Björkman Agrostis atrata Rydb., A. hildebrandii Thurb. ex Bol., A. humilis Vasey, A. Poaceae G5 S3 thurberiana Hitchc., Podagrostis thurberiana (Hitchc.) Hultén Podistera yukonensis Math. & Const. none Apiaceae G2 S1S2 Polygonum fowleri B. L. Robinson ssp. fowleri Polygonum buxifolium Nutt. ex Bong. Polygonaceae G5TNR S3S4 Polygonum minimum S. Watson Polygonum torreyi S. Watson Polygonaceae G5 S1 Polypodium sibiricum Sipliv. Polypodium vulgare ssp. virginianum sensu Hultén (1962), Polypodium vulgare sensu Polypodiaceae G5? S3 Böcher et al. (1978) Polystichum aleuticum C. Christens. none Dryopteridaceae G1 S1* Polystichum kruckebergii W. H. Wagner none Dryopteridaceae G4 S1* Polystichum microchlamys (H. Christ) Matsumura Aspidium microchlamys Christ Dryopteridaceae G4? S1* Polystichum setigerum (K. Presl) K. Presl Nephrodium setigerum C. Presl, Polystichum braunii (Spenner) Fée Dryopteridaceae G3 S3* ssp. alaskense (Maxon) Calder & R. L. Taylor, P. braunii var. alaskense (Maxon) Hultén Potamogeton obtusifolius Mert. & W. D. J. Koch none Potamogetonaceae G5 S3* Potamogeton robbinsii Oakes none Potamogetonaceae G5 S2* Potamogeton subsibiricus Hagström Potamogeton porsildorum Fernald, Potamogeton sibiricus ssp. subsibiricus (Hagström) Potamogetonaceae G3G4 S3S4 Tzvelev Potentilla drummondii Lehm. Potentilla anomalifolia M. Peck, P. anomalofolia M. Peck Rosaceae G5 S2S3* Potentilla fragiformis Willd. ex Schltdl. none Rosaceae G4 S1S2 Potentilla rubricaulis Lehm. Potentilla hookeriana Lehm. Rosaceae G4 SU* Potentilla stipularis L. Potentilla stipularis var. groenlandica T. J. Sørensen Rosaceae G5 S2

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-11 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Primula cuneifolia Leded. ssp. cuneifolia Primula cuneifolia var. dubyi Pax, P. cuneifolia var. elongata E. A. Busch Primulaceae G5TNR S1* Primula tschukstchorum Kjellman Primula beringensis (A. E. Porsild) Jurtzev, P. tschuktschorum ssp. beringensis (A. E. Primulaceae G2G3 S3* Porsild) Jurtzev & Kozhevnikov, P. tschuktschorum var. beringensis A. E. Porsild Puccinellia andersonii Swallen Phippsia andersonii (Swallen) Á. Löve & D. Löve, Puccinellia andersoni Swallen Poaceae G3G5 S1S2* Puccinellia angustata (R. Br.) E. L. Rand & Redfield Atropis angustata (R. Br.) Griseb., A. angustata (R. Br.) V. I. Krecz., Glyceria Poaceae G4Q S1* angustata (R. Br.) Fr., G. angustata (R. Br.) Vasey, Glyceria vaginata f. contracta Lange, Panicularia angustata (R. Br.) Scribn., Phippsia angustata (R. Br.) Á. Löve & D. Löve, Poa angustata R. Br., Puccinellia angustata (R. Br.) Nash, P. contracta (Lange) T. J. Sørensen, P. taimyrensis Roshev. Puccinellia arctica (Hook.) Fernald & Wealth Glyceria arctica Hook., Phippsia agrostidea (T. J. Sørensen) Á. Löve & D. Löve, P. Poaceae G4G5 S1 arctica (Hook.) Á. Löve & D. Löve, P. poacea (T.J. Sørensen) Á. Löve & D. Löve, Puccinellia poacea T. J. Sørensen, P. agrostidea T. J. Sørensen Puccinellia vaginata (Lange) Fernald & Wealth Glyceria vaginata Lange, Phippsia vaginata (Lange) Á. Löve & D. Löve, Puccinellia Poaceae G4 S1 vaginata var. paradoxa T. J. Sørensen Puccinellia vahliana (Liebm.) Scribn. & Merr. Colpodium vahlianum (Liebm.) Nevski, Phippsia vahliana (Liebm.) Á. Löve & D. Poaceae G4 S3 Löve, Poa vahliana Liebm. Puccinellia wrightii (Scribn. & Merr.) Colpodium wrightii Scribn. & Merr., C. wrightii var. flavum Scribn. & Merr., Phippsia Poaceae G3G4TNR S3 Tzvelev ssp. wrightii wrightii (Scribn. & Merr.) Á. Löve & D. Löve, Poa wrightii (Scribn. & Merr.) Hitchc. Ranunculus camissonis Schltdl. Beckwithia camissonis (Schltdl.) Tolm., B. glacialis ssp. camissonis (Schltdl.) Á. Löve & Ranunculaceae GNR S3 D. Löve, Ranunculus glacialis ssp. camissonis (Schltdl.) Hultén, R. glacialis var. camissonis (Schltdl.) L. D. Benson Ranunculus glacialis ssp. alaskensis Jurtz. Beckwithia glacialis ssp. alaskensis Jurtz. Ranunculaceae G4T2 S1S2 Ranunculus ponojensis (Markl.) Ericsson none Ranunculaceae GNR S2 Ranunculus sabinei R. Br. Ranunculus pygmaeus ssp. sabinei (R. Br.) Hultén, Ranunculus Ranunculaceae G4 S1 sabinei var. majusculus Tolmatchew Ranunculus turneri Greene ssp. turneri Ranunculus occidentalis var. turneri (Greene) L. D. Benson, R. Ranunculaceae G3TNR S2 propinquus ssp. turneri (Greene) Jelen. & Derv. Romanzoffia unalaschcensis Cham. none Hydrophyllaceae G3 S3S4 Rorippa curvisiliqua (Hook.) Bess. ex Britt. Sisymbrium curvisiliqua Hook., Nasturtium curvisiliqua (Hook.) Nutt., N. Brassicaceae G5 S1S2 curvisiliqua var. lyratum (Nutt.) S. Watson, N. curvisiliqua var. nuttallii S. Watson, N. lyratum Nutt., N. occidentale Greene, N. polymorphum Nutt., Radicula curvisiliqua (Hook.) Greene, R. lyrata (Nutt.) Greene, R. multicaulis (Greene) Greene, R. nuttallii (S. Watson) Greene, R. occidentalis (Greene) Greene, R. pectinata (A. Nelson) A. Heller, R. polymorpha (Nutt.) Greene, Rorippa curvisiliqua var. lyrata (Nutt.) C. L. Hitchcock, R. curvisiliqua var. nuttallii (S. Watson) Stuckey, R. curvisiliqua var. occidentalis (Greene) Stuckey, R. curvisiliqua var. orientalis Stuckey, R. curvisiliqua var. procumbens Stuckey, R. curvisiliqua var. spatulata Stuckey, R. lyrata (Nutt.) Greene, R. multicaulis Greene, R. nuttallii (S. Watson) Rydberg, R. occidentalis (Greene) Greene, R. pectinata A. Nelson, R. polymorpha (Nutt.) Howell

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-12 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Rosa woodsii Lindl. ssp. woodsii Rosa adenosepala Wooton & Standl., R. demareei E. J. Palmer, R. fendleri Crép., R. Rosaceae G5T5 S2S3* hypoleuca Wooton & Standl., R. macounii Greene, R. standleyi Rydb., R. terrens Lunell, R. woodsii var. adenosepala (Wooton & Standl.) W. C. Martin & C. R. Hutchins, R. woodsii var. fendleri (Crép.) Rydb., R. woodsii var. hypoleuca (Wooton & Standl.) W. C. Martin & C. R. Hutchins, R. woodsii var. macounii (Greene) W. C. Martin & C. R. Hutchins, R. woodsii var. terrens (Lunell) Breitung, R. woodsii Lindl. var. woodsii Rumex aureostigmaticus Kom. Acetosella aureostigmatica (Kom.) Tzvelev, Rumex Polygonaceae GNR S1 acetosella var. subspathulatus Trautv., Rumex graminifolius var. subspathulatus (Trautv.) Tolmatchew Rumex beringensis Petrovsky Acetosella beringensis (Jurtz. & V.V. Petrovsky) Á. Löve & D. Löve Polygonaceae G3 S3 Rumex krausei V. V. Petrovsky none Polygonaceae G2 S2S3 Salix athabascensis Raup. Salix fallax Raup, S. pedicellaris var. athabascensis (Raup) B. Boivin Salicaceae G4G5 S2* Salix candida Flüggé ex Willd. Salix candida var. denudata Andersson, S. candida var. tomentosa Andersson, S. Salicaceae G5 S3 candidula Niewl., S. x clarkei Bebb Salix hookeriana Barratt ex Hook. Salix amplifolia Coville, S. hookeriana var. laurifolia J. K. Henry, S. Salicaceae G5 S2S3* hookeriana var. tomentosa J. K. Henry ex C. K. Schneider, S. piperi Bebb Salix nummularia Andersson Salix nummularia ssp. tundricola (Schljakov) Á. Löve & D. Löve Salicaceae G5 SH Salix planifolia Pursh Salix monica Bebb, S. phylicifolia var. monica (Bebb) Jepson, S. Salicaceae G5T5 S2* phylicifolia ssp. planifolia (Pursh) Hiitonen, S. planifolia var. monica (Bebb) C. K. Schneider Salix prolixa Andersson Salix cordata var. mackenzieana Hook., S. eriocephala ssp. mackenzieana (Hook.) Salicaceae G5 S1 Dorn, S. mackenzieana (Hook.) Barratt ex Andersson, S. mackenzieana var. macrogemma C. R. Ball, S. rigida var. mackenzieana (Hook.) Cronquist, S. rigida var. macrogemma (C. R. Ball) Cronquist Saussurea americana D. C. Eaton none Asteraceae G5 S2S3 Saussurea triangulata Trautvetter & C. A. Meyer none Asteraceae GNR S1 Saxifraga adscendens ssp. oregonensis (Raf.) Bacig. Muscaria adscendens (L.) Sm., Saxifraga adscendens var. oregonensis (Raf.) Saxifragaceae G5T4T5 S2S3 Breitung, S. oregonensis (Raf.) A. Nelson Saxifraga aizoides L. Leptasea aizoides (L.) Haw. Saxifragaceae G5 S1 Saxifraga rivularis ssp. arctolitoralis (Jurtzev & V. V. Saxifraga arctolitoralis Jurtzev & V. V. Petrovsky Saxifragaceae G5T2T3 S2* Petrovsky) M. H. Jørgensen & Elven Saxifraga rivularis subsp. arctolitoralis (Jurtzev & V. Saxifraga arctolitoralis Jurtzev & V. V. Petrovsky Saxifragaceae G5T2T3 Pending V. Petrovsky) M. H. Jørgensen & Elven Saxifraga taylorii Calder & Savile Saxifraga taylori Calder & Savile Saxifragaceae G3G4 SP Schizachne purpurascens (Torr.) Swallen Avena striata Michx., A. striata f. albicans Fernald, A. torreyi Nash, Bromelica Poaceae G5 S2 striata (Hitchc.) Farw., Melica purpurascens (Torr.) Hitchc., M. striata Hitchc., M. striata f. albicans (Fernald) Fernald, Schizachne purpurascens f. albicans (Fernald) Fernald, S. purpurascens var. pubescens Dore, S. striata (Hitchc.) Hultén, S. stricta (Michx.) Hultén, Trisetum purpurascens Torr. Schoenoplectus pungens (Vahl) Palla Scirpus pungens Vahl Cyperaceae G4G5 S1*

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-13 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Schoenoplectus subterminalis (Torr.) Soják Scirpus subterminalis Torr. Cyperaceae G4G5 S2* Scolochloa festucacea (Willd.) Link Aira arundinacea Lilj. ex Roem & Schult., Arundo festucacea Willd., Donax Poaceae G5 S1 borealis Trin., D. festucaceus (Willd.) P. Beauv., Festuca borealis (Trin.) Mert. & Koch ex Röhl., F. donacina Wahlenb., Fluminia arundinacea (Roem. & Schult.) Fr., F. festucacea (Willd.) Hitchc., Glyceria arundinacea (Roem. & Schult.) Fr., Graphephorum arundinaceum (Roem. & Schult.) Asch., G. festucaceum (Willd.) A. Gray, Schedonorus arundinaceus Roem. & Schult., Scolochloa arundinacea (Roem. & Schult.) MacMill., Triodia festucacea (Willd.) Roth Sedum divergens S. Watson Amerosedum divergens (S. Watson) A. Löve & D. Löve Crassulaceae G5? S1 Sedum lanceolatum Torr. var. lanceolatum Sedum stenopetalum var. subalpinum Fröderström Crassulaceae G5T3T5 SP Sedum oreganum Nutt. var. oreganum Breitungia oregana (Nutt.) A. Löve & D. Löve, Gormania oregana (Nutt.) Britt. Crassulaceae G5TNR SH Senecio cannabifolius Less. Jacobaea cannabifolia (Less.) E. Wiebe, Senecio palmatus Pallas ex Ledeb. Asteraceae G4? S2 Sidalcea hendersonii S. Watson none Malvaceae G3 S1* Sieversia pentapetala (L.) Greene Dryas pentapetala L., Geum pentapetalum (L.) Makino Rosaceae G3G4 S2S3* Silene uralensis ssp. ogilviensis (A. E. Porsild) D. F. Gastrolychnis soczavana ssp. ogilviensis (A. E. Porsild) Á. Löve & D. Löve, Melandrium Caryophyllaceae G4G5T2 S1Q* Brunt apetalum ssp. ogilviense A. E. Porsild Sisyrinchium montanum Greene var. montanum Sisyrinchium alpestre E. P. Bicknell, S. heterocarpum E. P. Bicknell Iridaceae G5 S1* Smelowskia johnsonii G. A. Mulligan none Brassicaceae G1 S1 Smelowskia media (W. H. Drury & Rollins) Velichkin Smelowskia calycina var. media W. H. Drury & Rollins Brassicaceae GNR S2S3 Smelowskia pyriformis W. H. Drury & Rollins none Brassicaceae G2 S3 Sphenopholis intermedia (Rydb.) Rydb. Aira capillacea Frank ex Steud., A. controversa Steud., Eatonia intermedia Rydb., E. Poaceae G5 S1 pensylvanica var. major (Torr.) A. Gray, Koeleria pensylvanica var. major (Torr.) Torr., K. truncata var. major Torr., Reboulea pallens var. major (Torr.) Farw., Reboulea pensylvanica var. major (Torr.) A. Gray, Sphenopholis intermedia var. pilosa Dore, S. obtusata var. major (Torr.) Erdman, S. pallens ssp. major (Torr.) Scribn., S. pallens var. major (Torr.) Scribn. ex B. L. Rob., Vilfa alba Buckley Stachys mexicana Benth. Stachys ciliata Douglas ex Benth., S. emersonii Piper, S. pubens (A. Gray) A. Heller Lamiaceae G5 S1* Stellaria ruscifolia ssp. aleutica Hultén none Caryophyllaceae G4T3 S2S3* Stellaria umbellata Turczaninow Alsine baicalensis Coville, Stellaria gonomischa B. Boivin, S. weberi B. Boivin Caryophyllaceae G5 S3S4 Suaeda calceoliformis (Hook.) Moq. Chenopodium calceoliforme Hook., Suaeda americana (Pers.) Fernald, S. Chenopodiaceae G5 S1S2 depressa var. erecta S. Watson, S. erecta A. Nelson Symphoricarpos albus (L.) S. F. Blake none Caprifoliaceae G5 S2 Symphyotrichum falcatum (Lindl.) G. L. Aster elegantulus A. E. Porsild, A. falcatus Lindl., A. ramulosus Lindl. Asteraceae G5T4T5 S1S2 Nesom var. falcatum Symphyotrichum pygmaeum (Lindl.) Brouillet & Selliah Aster pygmaeus Lindl., A. sibiricus ssp. pygmaeus (Lindl.) Á. Löve & D. Löve, A. Asteraceae G2G4 S2 sibiricus var. pygmaeus (Lindl.) Cody, Eurybia pygmaea (Lindl.) G. L. Nesom Symphyotrichum yukonense (Cronquist) G. L. Nesom Aster yukonensis Cronquist, Virgulus yukonensis (Cronquist) Reveal & Keener Asteraceae G3 S3 Taxus brevifolia Nutt. Taxus baccata ssp. brevifolia (Nutt.) Pilger, T. baccata var. brevifolia (Nutt.) Koehne, T. Taxaceae G4G5 S3* baccata var. canadensis Bentham, T. bourcieri Carrière, T. lindleyana A. Murray

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-14 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-3. Alaska Natural Heritage Program 2012 Rare Vascular Plant List (continued) Global State Scientific Name and Authority Synonyms Family Rank Rank Thalictrum minus ssp. kemense (Fr.) Cajander Thalictrum flavum var. rotundifolium Wahlenb., Thalictrum hultenii B. Boivin Ranunculaceae GNR S2 Thalictrum occidentale A. Gray Thalictrum occidentale var. macounii B. Boivin, T. occidentale var. palousense H. St. Ranunculaceae G5 S2S3 John Tiarella trifoliata var. laciniata (Hook.) Wheelock Tiarella californica (Kellogg) Rydb., Tiarella laciniata Hook. Saxifragaceae G5T5? S3* Townsendia hookeri Beaman Townsendia nuttallii Dorn Asteraceae G5 S1 Trichophorum pumilum (Vahl) Schinz. & Thell. Baeothryon pumilum (Vahl) Á. Löve & D. Löve, Scirpus pumilus Vahl, S. Cyperaceae G5 S1* alpinus Schleicher ex Gaudin, S. emergens (Norman) Fernald, S. pumilus ssp. rollandii (Fernald) Raymond, S. pumilus var. rollandii (Fernald) Beetle, S. rollandii Fernald, Trichophorum emergens Norman, T. pumilum var. rollandii (Fernald) Hultén Trisetum sibiricum ssp. litoraleRupr. ex Roshev. Trisetum litorale (Rupr. ex Roshev.) A.P. Khokhr. Poaceae G5T4Q S3 Trollius membranostylis Hultén Trollius riederianus Schipcz. Ranunculaceae G4G5 S1 Veronica grandiflora Gaertn. none Plantaginaceae G3 S2S3* Vicia americana Muhl. ex Willd. Vicia americana var. americana Willd. Fabaceae G5 S2 Viola selkirkii Pursh ex Goldie none Violaceae G5? S3S4* Viola sempervirens Greene Viola sarmentosa Dougl. ex Hook. Violaceae G5 S1* Zannichellia palustris L. ssp. palustris Zannichellia major (Hartm.) Boenn. ex Rchb., Z. palustris var. major (Hartm.) W. D. J. Potamogetonaceae G5 S3S4* Koch, Z. palustris var. stenophylla Asch. & Graebn. Alaska Natural Heritage Program Rare Species Rankings: GLOBAL RANK (Global ranks are based on the world-wide status of a taxon and are assigned by The Nature Conservancy and an international network of Natural Heritage Programs and Conservation Data Centers.). G1: Critically imperiled globally because of extreme rarity (5 or fewer occurrences, or very few remaining individuals), or because of some factor of its biology making it especially vulnerable to extinction. (Critically endangered throughout its range.). G2: Imperiled globally because of rarity (6 to 20 occurrences) or because of other factors. demonstrably making it very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range. (Endangered throughout its range.). G3: Either very rare and local throughout its range or found locally (even abundantly at some of its locations) in a restricted range (21 to 100 occurrences). (Threatened throughout its range.). G4: Widespread and apparently secure globally, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery. G5: Demonstrably secure globally, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery. T#: Global rank of the described subspecies or variety. G#G#: Global rank of species uncertain, best described as a range between the two ranks. G#Q: Indicates some uncertainty about taxonomic status that might affect global rank. STATE RANK (State ranks are based on the status of the taxon within a particular state or province. The state ranks for taxa presented in this guide often differ from the ranks for the same taxa in other states or provinces.). S1: Critically imperiled in state because of extreme rarity (5 or fewer occurrences, or very few remaining individuals), or because of some factor of its biology making it especially vulnerable to extinction. (Critically endangered throughout in state.). S2: Imperiled in state because of rarity (6-20 occurrences), or because of other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S3: Rare or uncommon in the state (21-100 occurrences). SP: Occurring in nearby state or province; not yet reported in state, but probably will be encountered with further inventory. S#S#: State rank of species uncertain, best described as a range between the two ranks

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A3-15 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Attachment 4 – Swan Lake Project Area Photos

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Steep vegetated slopes in analysis area

Steep avalanche chute (a) and rock slop (b) in analysis area

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A4-1 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Steep slopes and cliff faces in analysis area

Moss muskeg area north of Track Creek

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A4-2 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Forested wetland along Lost Creek

Emergent wetland along north shore near Lost Creek

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A4-3 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Emergent wetland along southeastern shore

Northern bugleweed along Lost Creek

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A4-4 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Pacific buttercup and northern bugleweed habitat along Lost Creek (a)

Pacific buttercup and northern bugleweed habitat along Lost Creek (b)

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A4-5 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Backwater channel along Lost Creek

Track Creek

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A4-6 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Mint Creek

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A4-7 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Attachment 5 – Botanical Survey Types

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-5. Survey Types

Survey Type Description Field Check The survey area is given a quick “once over” but the surveyor does not walk completely through the project area. The entire area is not examined. Cursory A Cursory survey is appropriately used to confirm the presence of species of interest identified in previous surveys or in the pre-field analysis. By its nature, the cursory survey is rapid, and does not provide in-depth environmental information. The entire area is traversed at least once. For example, stand condition as seen in aerial photography can be verified by a cursory survey. Also, a cursory survey can be used to determine if a plant population that had been previously documented at a site remains present or intact.

General The survey area is given a closer review by walking through the area and its perimeter or by walking more than once through the area. Most of the area is examined

Focused (Intuitive The Focused, or Intuitive Controlled, survey is the most commonly used and most Controlled) efficient method of surveying for TES plants. During pre-field analysis, potential suitable habitat is identified for each species of interest and the survey effort is focused in those areas. This method requires adequate knowledge of suitable habitat in order to accurately select the areas of focused searching. When conducting intuitive controlled surveys, an area somewhat larger than the identified suitable habitat should be searched to validate current suitable habitat definitions.

Random Random surveys employ an undirected, typically non-linear, traverse through a project area. They are employed either when there is inadequate natural history information about a species to discern its suitable habitat and the surveyor is simply searching for occurrences, or when a target species is very abundant within a search area and the surveyor is attempting to make estimates of population parameters such as intra-patch variations in density or the occurrence of predation or herbivory. However, a stratified random survey may be more effective in these latter cases.

Stratified Random This survey is most often used within known population areas of target species, or when an area to be surveyed is of unknown habitat suitability and is relatively large. Stratified random surveys employ a series of randomly selected plots of equal size within a project area that are each thoroughly searched for target species. When conducting a stratified random survey, it is important to sample an adequate number of plots that are of sufficient size if statistical inference regarding the survey area is desired (discussion of sample designs, see Elzinga, C., et al. 1998).

Systematic Typically used in limited areas where the likelihood of occurrence of a target species may be evenly distributed throughout the survey area. Systematic surveys are often employed either within focused search areas (e.g., stratified random and intuitive controlled methods), or when a proposed project is likely to produce significant habitat alterations for species that are especially sensitive to the proposed activities.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A5-1 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Attachment 6 – Rare Plant Element Occurrence Field Forms

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Version: Revised Final Enclosure 2 R10 TES PLANT ELEMENT OCCURRENCE - FIELD FORM - USDA FOREST SERVICE 12/08 ® = required field, ®* = conditionally required field, ® = required field Alaska Region

General Information

1) SITE ID: ® 2) DATE: ® 8/7/2012 3) SITE NAME: SWAN LOST CREEK 4) NRCS PLANT CODE: ® GAKA (POPULATION GAKA 1) 5) SCIENTIFIC NAME: ® GALIUM KAMTSCHATICUM 6) RECORD SOURCE: ® FS 7) SURVEY ID: ®* 8) Survey Name: Swan Lake Exp. 9) EXAMINER(S)- LAST: ® BECK FIRST: ® Kathryn MIDDLE INITIAL: A LAST: BRIMACOMBE FIRST: KAREN MIDDLE INITIAL: A 10) OWNERSHIP: ® USFS 11) Loc. Uncert: ® 12) Uncert. Dist: ®* 13) E.O. # 14) STATE: ®* AK 15) COUNTY: ®* 16) REGION: ®* 10 17) FOREST: ®* TONGASS 18) DISTRICT: ®* KETCHIKAN-MISTY FIORDS 19) Area (Est): 20) Area UOM: ®* 21) Canopy Cover Method ®* (circle one): COVER PERCENT; DAUBEN; NRMCOV

Element Occurrence Data

22) EO Canopy Cover: ®%Cov: <1% or Cover Class Code: 23) Lifeform: Forb 24) Number of subpopulations: 0 25) Plant Found (Revisit): Yes or No 26)Plant Count:® 30+ 27)Count Type: ®Genets/Ramets 28)Count: ® Actual 29) Revisit needed - Yes or No 30) Revisit Date: 31) Revisit Justification: 32)Phenology by %® 33) Population Comments: (e.g., distribution, vigor, density, phenology, dispersal) (Sum to 100%): Population moderately vigorous, scattered in area on hummocks. There are likely Vegetative . . . . . _10 more plants than actually observed. Plants are small rhizomatous patches (ave. 2’ x 2’). Flower/Bud . . . _15

Fruit/Dispersed . _75 Seedlings/ 34) Evidence of disease, competition, predation, collection, trampling, or Juvenile . . . . . ___ herbivory: Yes___ or No _X__ 35) Evidence Comments:

36) Pollinator observed – Yes or No 37) Pollinator type(s): 38) Pollinator comments:

Site Morphometry

39) Percent Slope: ® 1 % 40) Slope position: ® BOTTOM 41) Aspect: ® azimuth: varies or cardinal: 42) Elev.: Ave: 335 Min: Max: 43) Elev UOM: ®* FEET

Soil Characteristics and Light Conditions 44) Substrate on which EO occurs: DU, M, S 45) Parent Material: 46) Soil Moisture: W 47) Soil Texture: SL 48) Soil Type: 49) Light Exposure: ® FSH

09/18/2008 Page 1 of 5 Enclosure 2 SITE ID:

Site Classifications Record taxonomic units of the given type(s) if published classifications exist for the area.

CLASSIFICATION TYPE CLASS CODE CLASSIFICATION SHORT NAME CLASSIFICATION SET 50) Existing Veg® 51) Potential Veg 52) Ecotype

Habitat Quality and Management Comments

53) Habitat Description: Plants growing in moist, undulating, moss, duff, and soil on hummocks, under tall shrub layer, in riparian terrace. 54) Dominant Process: 90 55) Process Comment: Riparian process 56) Community Quality (L, M, H): H 57) Landscape Integrity (L, M, H): H 58) Disturbance/Threats (present or imminent): A small foot path has been brushed out in the vicinity of some of the plants in the population. Some of these plants might be flooded if the dam pool were raised. 59) Disturbance/Threats Comment:

60) Non-Native Comment: No nonnatives present in this habitat.

61) Current Land Use Comment:

Canopy Cover

Record % canopy cover by actual percent, or by cover class (as indicated in General Information Block). Lifeform Canopy Cover 62) % Cov or Code Ground Cover 63) % Cov or Code Tree 30 Bare Shrub 90 Gravel Forb 60 Rock Graminoid Tr Bedrock Non-vascular 45 Moss 50 Lichen 5 Litter/Duff 50 Algae Basal Veg Water Tr Road surface Lichen SITE ID:

Associated Species

List species directly associated with the EO species on this site. Record the NRCS Plant Code, scientific name or both. If desired, indicate lifeform, dominant species, % cover for each species and flag non-native species.

09/18/2008 Page 2 of 5 Enclosure 2 64) Completeness of Species List: ®* C, R, OR S ® 65) Species List Comment:

66) ® 67) ® 68) 69) 70) 71) NRCS Scientific Name Life Dom. % Cov or Non- Plant Code Form (Y/N) Class native Picea sitchensis T Y Alnus rubra T Y Ribes bracteosum S Y Rubus spectabilis S Y Oplopanax horridum S Vaccinium parviflorum S Gymnocarpium dryopteris F Y Dryopteris expansa F Y Athyrium felix-femina F y Thelypteris connectilis F Streptopus amplexicaulis F Coptis trifolia F Tiarella trifoliata F Viola sp. F Circaea alpina F Lysichiton americanum F Trisetum cernuum g

EO Specimen Documentation

72) Reference for ID: 73) Primary Collector – ®Last Name: BECK First Name: Kathryn M.I. A. Other Collectors – ®Last Name: First Name: M.I. 74) Collection #: ®* 201211 75) ID Confirmed: ®* Y: or N: or Questionable: 76) Verification: ® 77) Specimen Repository: ®* WTU SITE ID:

Image Information ® (IF IMAGES TAKEN)

78) Image ID 79) Image Description

09/18/2008 Page 3 of 5 Enclosure 2

Location Information (State, County, Region, Forest, District will be auto-populated by the database application when the spatial feature is entered) 80) USGS Quad Number: 81) USGS Quad Name: 82) Forest Quad Number: 83) Forest Quad Name:

84) Legal Description: Required where public land survey is available. Meridian: Township and Range: T72S R92E S 12 SW1/4 and SE1/4 of NW1/4 Section:__ 12 Q Sec:___ QQ Sec: ____ QQQ Sec: ____ QQQQ Sec: ____

85) Latitude and Longitude ®FOR TONGASS (either in degrees, minutes, seconds or in decimal degrees) Geodetic Datum: Latitude: Degrees __ _ N Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ Longitude: Degrees ______W Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ GPS Datum: GPS Lat. Dec. Degrees: 55.6400 GPS Long. Dec. Degrees: 131.2470 55.6400 131.2493

86) UTM® FOR CHUGACH UTM Datum: UTM Zone: Easting: 358569 Northing: 6168289 358426 6168307

87) GPS Equipment Used (Manufacturer and Model):

88) Metes and Bounds

09/18/2008 Page 4 of 5 Enclosure 2

SITE ID:

89) Directions to Site

Boat up far northeast arm of Swan Lake (22 miles northeast of Ketchikan) until it becomes Lost Creek. Plants are scattered on both sides of creek under dense shrub thickets on riparian terrace.

90) Sketch of Site or Area

91) General EO Comments

The entire riparian terrace was not searched. The shrub understory is very dense and difficult to get around in. Est. 30 rhizomatous patches of plants were observed; there are probably more.

Galium kamtschaticum GPS points:

‐131.2470 55.6400 ‐131.2470 55.6399 ‐131.2467 55.6408 ‐131.2468 55.6406 ‐131.2481 55.6395 ‐131.2493 55.6400

09/18/2008 Page 5 of 5 Enclosure 2 R10 TES PLANT ELEMENT OCCURRENCE - FIELD FORM - USDA FOREST SERVICE 12/08 ® = required field, ®* = conditionally required field, ® = required field Alaska Region

General Information

1) SITE ID: ® 2) DATE: ® 8/6/2012 3) SITE NAME: SWAN LAKE 4) NRCS PLANT CODE: ® LYUN (POPULATION LYUN 1) 5) SCIENTIFIC NAME: ® LYCOPUS UNIFLORUS 6) RECORD SOURCE: ® FS 7) SURVEY ID: ®* 8) Survey Name: Swan Lake Exp. 9) EXAMINER(S)- LAST: ® BECK FIRST: ® Kathryn MIDDLE INITIAL: A LAST: BRIMACOMBE FIRST: KAREN MIDDLE INITIAL: A 10) OWNERSHIP: ® USFS 11) Loc. Uncert: ® 12) Uncert. Dist: ®* 13) E.O. # 14) STATE: ®* AK 15) COUNTY: ®* 16) REGION: ®* 10 17) FOREST: ®* TONGASS 18) DISTRICT: ®* KETCHIKAN-MISTY FIORDS 19) Area (Est): 20) Area UOM: ®* 21) Canopy Cover Method ®* (circle one): COVER PERCENT; DAUBEN; NRMCOV

Element Occurrence Data

22) EO Canopy Cover: ®%Cov: <1% or Cover Class Code: 23) Lifeform: Forb 24) Number of subpopulations: 0 25) Plant Found (Revisit): Yes or No 26)Plant Count:® 100s 27)Count Type: ®Genets/Ramets 28)Count: ® Estimate 29) Revisit needed - Yes or No 30) Revisit Date: 31) Revisit Justification: 32)Phenology by %® 33) Population Comments: (e.g., distribution, vigor, density, phenology, dispersal) (Sum to 100%): Population quite vigorous, this species seems to thrive in the habitat created by the Vegetative . . . . . _60 dam and fluctuating water levels. Many of the ramets were vegetative or were just starting to bloom. Flower/Bud . . . _ Fruit/Dispersed . _40 34) Evidence of disease, competition, predation, collection, trampling, or Seedlings/ herbivory: Yes___ or No _X__ Juvenile . . . . . ___ 35) Evidence Comments:

36) Pollinator observed – Yes or No 37) Pollinator type(s): 38) Pollinator comments:

Site Morphometry

39) Percent Slope: ® 0 - 5 % 40) Slope position: ® BOTTOM 41) Aspect: ® azimuth: varies or cardinal: 42) Elev.: Ave: 330 Min: Max: 43) Elev UOM: ®* FEET

Soil Characteristics and Light Conditions 44) Substrate on which EO occurs: M 45) Parent Material: 46) Soil Moisture: W 47) Soil Texture: SL 48) Soil Type: 49) Light Exposure: ® SUN, PSH

09/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 Enclosure 2 SITE ID:

Site Classifications Record taxonomic units of the given type(s) if published classifications exist for the area.

CLASSIFICATION TYPE CLASS CODE CLASSIFICATION SHORT NAME CLASSIFICATION SET 50) Existing Veg® 51) Potential Veg 52) Ecotype

Habitat Quality and Management Comments

53) Habitat Description: Plants growing in numerous rhizomatous patches around lake shore either submerged by the high water levels, or in moist substrate up on the shore. It grows in moist soil, rock crevices, moist logs and moss. This species seems to thrive in the habitat created by the dam and fluctuating water levels. The survey was done when the reservoir was at full pool. From the full pool level, it is unknown how far below the high water level this species can survive. We did not attempt to completely map this population. 54) Dominant Process: 90 55) Process Comment: 56) Community Quality (L, M, H): H 57) Landscape Integrity (L, M, H): H 58) Disturbance/Threats (present or imminent): If raised the dam pool were raised, this population would likely survive via root fragments, submerged plants, and repopulate from adjacent subpopulations, eg. plants along the road. 59) Disturbance/Threats Comment:

60) Non-Native Comment: Few nonnatives present with this species.

61) Current Land Use Comment: Hydroelectric production.

Canopy Cover

Record % canopy cover by actual percent, or by cover class (as indicated in General Information Block). Lifeform Canopy Cover 62) % Cov or Code Ground Cover 63) % Cov or Code Tree Bare Shrub Gravel Forb Rock Graminoid Bedrock Non-vascular Moss Lichen Litter/Duff Algae Basal Veg Water Road surface Lichen

09/18/2008 Page 2 of 2 Enclosure 2 SITE ID:

Associated Species

List species directly associated with the EO species on this site. Record the NRCS Plant Code, scientific name or both. If desired, indicate lifeform, dominant species, % cover for each species and flag non-native species. 64) Completeness of Species List: ®* C, R, OR S ® 65) Species List Comment:

66) ® 67) ® 68) 69) 70) 71) NRCS Scientific Name Life Dom. % Cov or Non- Plant Code Form (Y/N) Class native Alnus sinuata T Rubus spectabilis S Picea sitchensis T Ribes bracteosum S Oplopanax horridum S Tolmiea menziesii F Equisetum arvense F Ranunculus uncinatus F Prenanthes alata F Galium triflorum F Epilobium spp. F Achillea borealis F Athyrium felix-femina F

EO Specimen Documentation

72) Reference for ID: 73) Primary Collector – ®Last Name: BECK First Name: Kathryn M.I. A. Other Collectors – ®Last Name: First Name: M.I. 74) Collection #: ®* 201207, 201210 75) ID Confirmed: ®* Y: or N: or Questionable: 76) Verification: ® 77) Specimen Repository: ®* 09/18/2008 Page 3 of 3 Enclosure 2 SITE ID:

Image Information ® (IF IMAGES TAKEN)

78) Image ID 79) Image Description

Location Information (State, County, Region, Forest, District will be auto-populated by the database application when the spatial feature is entered) 80) USGS Quad Number: 81) USGS Quad Name: 82) Forest Quad Number: 83) Forest Quad Name:

84) Legal Description: Required where public land survey is available. Meridian: Township and Range: T72S R92E Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 20, 27 Section:__ Q Sec:___ QQ Sec: ____ QQQ Sec: ____ QQQQ Sec: ____

85) Latitude and Longitude ®FOR TONGASS (either in degrees, minutes, seconds or in decimal degrees) Geodetic Datum: Latitude: Degrees __ _ N Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ Longitude: Degrees ______W Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ GPS Datum: GPS Lat. Dec. Degrees: 55.6137 GPS Long. Dec. Degrees: 131.3329 Additional points in Field 91

86) UTM® FOR CHUGACH UTM Datum: UTM Zone: Easting: ______6165556 Northing: ______353069

87) GPS Equipment Used (Manufacturer and Model):

Trimble Geo HX 88) Metes and Bounds

09/18/2008 Page 4 of 4 Enclosure 2

SITE ID:

89) Directions to Site

From the west end of Swan Lake (22 miles northeast of Ketchikan) boat to shore areas that are gently sloping to moderately steep. Plants are growing underwater (when the lake is at full pool level) and above water level along lake shore. Substrates include moss, soil, in rock crevices and on moist logs near lake shore.

90) Sketch of Site or Area

91) General EO Comments

This species was commonly observed growing around the edge of the lake, both submerged in the water and up on the shore; it is incompletely mapped.

Swan Lake Lycopus uniflorus points: ‐131.3329 55.6137 ‐131.2446 55.6421 ‐131.2439 55.6424 ‐131.2490 55.6378 ‐131.2621 55.6336 ‐131.2920 55.5950 ‐131.2461 55.6315 ‐131.2580 55.6350 ‐131.3413 55.6143 ‐131.2529 55.6364

09/18/2008 Page 5 of 5 Enclosure 2 R10 TES PLANT ELEMENT OCCURRENCE - FIELD FORM - USDA FOREST SERVICE 12/08 ® = required field, ®* = conditionally required field, ® = required field Alaska Region

General Information

1) SITE ID: ® 2) DATE: ® 8/9/2012 3) SITE NAME: SWAN LAKE ROAD 4) NRCS PLANT CODE: ® LYUN (POPULATION LYUN 2) 5) SCIENTIFIC NAME: ® LYCOPUS UNIFLORUS 6) RECORD SOURCE: ® FS 7) SURVEY ID: ®* 8) Survey Name: Swan Lake Exp. 9) EXAMINER(S)- LAST: ® BECK FIRST: ® Kathryn MIDDLE INITIAL: A LAST: BRIMACOMBE FIRST: KAREN MIDDLE INITIAL: A 10) OWNERSHIP: ® USFS 11) Loc. Uncert: ® 12) Uncert. Dist: ®* 13) E.O. # 14) STATE: ®* AK 15) COUNTY: ®* 16) REGION: ®* 10 17) FOREST: ®* TONGASS 18) DISTRICT: ®* KETCHIKAN-MISTY FIORDS 19) Area (Est): 20) Area UOM: ®* 21) Canopy Cover Method ®* (circle one): COVER PERCENT; DAUBEN; NRMCOV

Element Occurrence Data

22) EO Canopy Cover: ®%Cov: <1% or Cover Class Code: 23) Lifeform: Forb 24) Number of subpopulations: 0 25) Plant Found (Revisit): Yes or No 26)Plant Count:® 20+ 27)Count Type: ®Genets/Ramets 28)Count: ® Estimate 29) Revisit needed - Yes or No 30) Revisit Date: 31) Revisit Justification: 32)Phenology by %® 33) Population Comments: (e.g., distribution, vigor, density, phenology, dispersal) (Sum to 100%): Population vigorous, this species seems to thrive in disturbed habitats created by the Vegetative . . . . . _60 dam project. Many of the ramets were vegetative or were just starting to bloom. Flower/Bud . . . _ 34) Evidence of disease, competition, predation, collection, trampling, or Fruit/Dispersed . _40 herbivory: Yes___ or No __X_ Seedlings/ 35) Evidence Comments: Juvenile . . . . . ___

36) Pollinator observed – Yes or No 37) Pollinator type(s): 38) Pollinator comments:

Site Morphometry

39) Percent Slope: ® 0 - 5 % 40) Slope position: ® 41) Aspect: ® azimuth: varies or cardinal: 42) Elev.: Ave: Min: 20 Max: 330 43) Elev UOM: ®* FEET

Soil Characteristics and Light Conditions 44) Substrate on which EO occurs: M 45) Parent Material: 46) Soil Moisture: W 47) Soil Texture: SL 48) Soil Type: 49) Light Exposure: ® SUN, PSH

09/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 Enclosure 2 SITE ID:

Site Classifications Record taxonomic units of the given type(s) if published classifications exist for the area.

CLASSIFICATION TYPE CLASS CODE CLASSIFICATION SHORT NAME CLASSIFICATION SET 50) Existing Veg® 51) Potential Veg 52) Ecotype

Habitat Quality and Management Comments

53) Habitat Description: Plants growing in numerous rhizomatous patches along the road to the dam, in wet ditches, graveled areas and on the road surface. This species seems to thrive in disturbed habitat created by the project. It is incompletely mapped. 54) Dominant Process: 70 55) Process Comment: 56) Community Quality (L, M, H): L 57) Landscape Integrity (L, M, H): L 58) Disturbance/Threats (present or imminent): EX, RM, OV 59) Disturbance/Threats Comment: If construction occurred along the road and in gravel pits here, this population would likely survive as it seems to do well with disturbance. It could also repopulate via root fragments and/or from adjacent subpopulations.

60) Non-Native Comment: Numerous non-native species are present with the Lycopus (Trifolium sp, Veronica spp., Plantago major, Leucanthemum vulgare, Taraxacum officinale). It does not seem to be out- competed, however.

61) Current Land Use Comment: Hydroelectric production.

Canopy Cover

Record % canopy cover by actual percent, or by cover class (as indicated in General Information Block). Lifeform Canopy Cover 62) % Cov or Code Ground Cover 63) % Cov or Code Tree Bare Shrub Gravel Forb Rock Graminoid Bedrock Non-vascular Moss Lichen Litter/Duff Algae Basal Veg Water Road surface Lichen SITE ID:

Associated Species

09/18/2008 Page 2 of 2 Enclosure 2 List species directly associated with the EO species on this site. Record the NRCS Plant Code, scientific name or both. If desired, indicate lifeform, dominant species, % cover for each species and flag non-native species. 64) Completeness of Species List: ®* C, R, OR S ® 65) Species List Comment:

66) ® 67) ® 68) 69) 70) 71) NRCS Scientific Name Life Dom. % Cov or Non- Plant Code Form (Y/N) Class native Alnus sinuata T Rubus spectabilis S Picea sitchensis T Rubus parviflorus S Aruncus Sylvester S Leucanthmum vulgare F X Equisetum arvense F Tiarella trifoliata F Veronica spp. F X Galium triflorum F Epiobium spp. F Achillea borealis F Athyrium felix-femina F Juncus spp. G Trifolium repens F X Plantago sp. F X

EO Specimen Documentation

72) Reference for ID: 73) Primary Collector – ®Last Name: BECK First Name: Kathryn M.I. A. Other Collectors – ®Last Name: First Name: M.I. 74) Collection #: ®* 201244 75) ID Confirmed: ®* Y: or N: or Questionable: 76) Verification: ® 77) Specimen Repository: ®* WTU SITE ID:

09/18/2008 Page 3 of 3 Enclosure 2

Image Information ® (IF IMAGES TAKEN)

78) Image ID 79) Image Description

Location Information (State, County, Region, Forest, District will be auto-populated by the database application when the spatial feature is entered) 80) USGS Quad Number: 81) USGS Quad Name: 82) Forest Quad Number: 83) Forest Quad Name:

84) Legal Description: Required where public land survey is available. Meridian: Township and Range: T72S R92E S 20, 19 Section:__ Q Sec:___ QQ Sec: ____ QQQ Sec: ____ QQQQ Sec: ____

85) Latitude and Longitude ®FOR TONGASS (either in degrees, minutes, seconds or in decimal degrees) Geodetic Datum: Latitude: Degrees __ _ N Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ Longitude: Degrees ______W Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ GPS Datum: GPS Lat. Dec. Degrees: 55.6153 GPS Long. Dec. Degrees: 131.3450 Second point 55.6157 131.3435

86) UTM® FOR CHUGACH UTM Datum: UTM Zone: Easting: ______Northing: ______352313 6165756 Second point 352408 6165798 87) GPS Equipment Used (Manufacturer and Model):

88) Metes and Bounds

09/18/2008 Page 4 of 4 Enclosure 2

SITE ID:

89) Directions to Site

Travel the road from the shore of Carroll Inlet up to Swan Lake (area 22 miles northeast of Ketchikan). Look for scattered patches of plants growing on the roadside, in gravel pits and in wet ditches adjacent the road.

90) Sketch of Site or Area

91) General EO Comments

No attempt was made to completely map this species along the road. It was also commonly observed growing around the edge of Swan Lake, both submerged in the water and up on the shore.

09/18/2008 Page 5 of 5 Enclosure 2 R10 TES PLANT ELEMENT OCCURRENCE - FIELD FORM - USDA FOREST SERVICE 12/08 ® = required field, ®* = conditionally required field, ® = required field Alaska Region

General Information

1) SITE ID: ® 2) DATE: ® 8/8/2012 3) SITE NAME: SWAN LAKE 4) NRCS PLANT CODE: ® PLCH3 (POPULATION PLC H 1) 5) SCIENTIFIC NAME: ® PLATANTHERA CHORISIANA 6) RECORD SOURCE: ® FS 7) SURVEY ID: ®* 8) Survey Name: Swan Lake Exp. 9) EXAMINER(S)- LAST: ® BECK FIRST: ® Kathryn MIDDLE INITIAL: A LAST: BRIMACOMBE FIRST: KAREN MIDDLE INITIAL: A 10) OWNERSHIP: ® USFS 11) Loc. Uncert: ® 12) Uncert. Dist: ®* 13) E.O. # 14) STATE: ®* AK 15) COUNTY: ®* 16) REGION: ®* 10 17) FOREST: ®* TONGASS 18) DISTRICT: ®* KETCHIKAN-MISTY FIORDS 19) Area (Est): 20) Area UOM: ®* 21) Canopy Cover Method ®* (circle one): COVER PERCENT; DAUBEN; NRMCOV

Element Occurrence Data

22) EO Canopy Cover: ®%Cov: <1% or Cover Class Code: 23) Lifeform: Forb 24) Number of subpopulations: 0 25) Plant Found (Revisit): Yes or No 26)Plant Count:® 2 27)Count Type: ®Genets/Ramets 28)Count: ® Actual 29) Revisit needed - Yes or No 30) Revisit Date: 31) Revisit Justification: 32)Phenology by %® 33) Population Comments: (e.g., distribution, vigor, density, phenology, dispersal) (Sum to 100%): 2 plants, 1 in fruit, not a vigorous population. Vegetative . . . . . _50 34) Evidence of disease, competition, predation, collection, trampling, or Flower/Bud . . . _ herbivory: Yes___ or No __X_ Fruit/Dispersed . _50 35) Evidence Comments: Seedlings/ Juvenile . . . . . ___

36) Pollinator observed – Yes or No 37) Pollinator type(s): 38) Pollinator comments:

Site Morphometry

39) Percent Slope: ® 1 % 40) Slope position: ® BOTTOM 41) Aspect: ® azimuth: varies or cardinal: 42) Elev.: Ave: 330 Min: Max: 43) Elev UOM: ®* FEET

Soil Characteristics and Light Conditions 44) Substrate on which EO occurs: M 45) Parent Material: 46) Soil Moisture: W 47) Soil Texture: SL 48) Soil Type: 49) Light Exposure: ® PSH

09/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 Enclosure 2 SITE ID:

Site Classifications Record taxonomic units of the given type(s) if published classifications exist for the area.

CLASSIFICATION TYPE CLASS CODE CLASSIFICATION SHORT NAME CLASSIFICATION SET 50) Existing Veg® 51) Potential Veg 52) Ecotype

Habitat Quality and Management Comments

53) Habitat Description: Plants growing in small, sloping muskeg adjacent lakeshore. 54) Dominant Process: 90 55) Process Comment: 56) Community Quality (L, M, H): H 57) Landscape Integrity (L, M, H): H 58) Disturbance/Threats (present or imminent): This small population would be inundated if dam pool were raised. 59) Disturbance/Threats Comment:

60) Non-Native Comment: No nonnatives present in this habitat.

61) Current Land Use Comment:

Canopy Cover

Record % canopy cover by actual percent, or by cover class (as indicated in General Information Block). Lifeform Canopy Cover 62) % Cov or Code Ground Cover 63) % Cov or Code Tree Bare Shrub Gravel Forb Rock Graminoid Bedrock Non-vascular Moss 80 Lichen Litter/Duff 15 Algae Basal Veg Water 5 Road surface Lichen SITE ID:

Associated Species

List species directly associated with the EO species on this site. Record the NRCS Plant Code, scientific name or both. If desired, indicate lifeform, dominant species, % cover for each species and flag non-native species.

09/18/2008 Page 2 of 2 Enclosure 2 64) Completeness of Species List: ®* C, R, OR S ® 65) Species List Comment:

66) ® 67) ® 68) 69) 70) 71) NRCS Scientific Name Life Dom. % Cov or Non- Plant Code Form (Y/N) Class native Tsuga mertensiana T Y Chaemycyparis nootkatensis T Y Vaccinium vitis-idaea S Y Cornus canadensis S Y Ledum groenlandicum S Sanguisorba sitchensis F Oxyria digyna F Y Carex sp. G Y Nephyrophyllidium crista-galli F y Sphagnum spp. M

EO Specimen Documentation

72) Reference for ID: 73) Primary Collector – ®Last Name: BECK First Name: Kathryn M.I. A. Other Collectors – ®Last Name: First Name: M.I. 74) Collection #: ®* 75) ID Confirmed: ®* Y: or N: or Questionable: 76) Verification: ® 77) Specimen Repository: ®* SITE ID:

Image Information ® (IF IMAGES TAKEN)

78) Image ID 79) Image Description

09/18/2008 Page 3 of 3 Enclosure 2

Location Information (State, County, Region, Forest, District will be auto-populated by the database application when the spatial feature is entered) 80) USGS Quad Number: 81) USGS Quad Name: 82) Forest Quad Number: 83) Forest Quad Name:

84) Legal Description: Required where public land survey is available. Meridian: Township and Range: T72S R92E S 27 NE¼ of SW1/4 Section:__ Q Sec:___ QQ Sec: ____ QQQ Sec: ____ QQQQ Sec: ____

85) Latitude and Longitude ®FOR TONGASS (either in degrees, minutes, seconds or in decimal degrees) Geodetic Datum: Latitude: Degrees __ _ N Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ Longitude: Degrees ______W Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ GPS Datum: GPS Lat. Dec. Degrees: 55.5971 GPS Long. Dec. Degrees: 131.2930

86) UTM® FOR CHUGACH UTM Datum: UTM Zone: Easting: ______Northing: ______

87) GPS Equipment Used (Manufacturer and Model):

88) Metes and Bounds

09/18/2008 Page 4 of 4 Enclosure 2

SITE ID:

89) Directions to Site

From the west end of the lake, boat to the southern arm of Swan Lake (22 miles northeast of Ketchikan. The only muskeg on the lakeshore is on the east side of this arm of the lake (north of Mint Creek). Plants are near the lake shore, near some trees in gently sloping muskeg.

90) Sketch of Site or Area

91) General EO Comments

This small muskeg was fairly well searched (despite driving rain), though vegetative plants may have been missed.

09/18/2008 Page 5 of 5 Enclosure 2 R10 TES PLANT ELEMENT OCCURRENCE - FIELD FORM - USDA FOREST SERVICE 12/08 ® = required field, ®* = conditionally required field, ® = required field Alaska Region

General Information

1) SITE ID: ® 2) DATE: ® 8/7/2012 3) SITE NAME: LOST CREEK 4) NRCS PLANT CODE: ® RAPA (POPULATION RAPA 1) 5) SCIENTIFIC NAME: ® RANUNCULUS PACIFICUS 6) RECORD SOURCE: ® FS 7) SURVEY ID: ®* 8) Survey Name: Swan Lake Exp. 9) EXAMINER(S)- LAST: ® BECK FIRST: ® Kathryn MIDDLE INITIAL: A LAST: BRIMACOMBE FIRST: KAREN MIDDLE INITIAL: A 10) OWNERSHIP: ® USFS 11) Loc. Uncert: ® 12) Uncert. Dist: ®* 13) E.O. # 14) STATE: ®* AK 15) COUNTY: ®* KETCHIKAN 16) REGION: ®* 10 17) FOREST: ®* TONGASS 18) DISTRICT: ®* KETCHIKAN-MISTY FIORDS 19) Area (Est): 20) Area UOM: ®* 21) Canopy Cover Method ®* (circle one): COVER PERCENT; DAUBEN; NRMCOV

Element Occurrence Data

22) EO Canopy Cover: ®%Cov: <1% or Cover Class Code: 23) Lifeform: Forb 24) Number of subpopulations: 0 25) Plant Found (Revisit): Yes or No 26)Plant Count:® 10 27)Count Type: ®Genets/Ramets 28)Count: ® Estimate 29) Revisit needed - Yes or No 30) Revisit Date: 31) Revisit Justification: 32)Phenology by %® 33) Population Comments: (e.g., distribution, vigor, density, phenology, dispersal) (Sum to 100%): Population not very vigorous. Vegetative . . . . . _20 34) Evidence of disease, competition, predation, collection, trampling, or Flower/Bud . . . _80 herbivory: Yes___ or No __X_ Fruit/Dispersed . _ 35) Evidence Comments: Seedlings/ Juvenile . . . . . ___

36) Pollinator observed – Yes or No 37) Pollinator type(s): 38) Pollinator comments:

Site Morphometry

39) Percent Slope: ® 0 - 5 % 40) Slope position: ® BOTTOM 41) Aspect: ® azimuth: varies or cardinal: 42) Elev.: Ave: 340 Min: Max: 43) Elev UOM: ®* FEET

Soil Characteristics and Light Conditions 44) Substrate on which EO occurs: M, L 45) Parent Material: 46) Soil Moisture: W 47) Soil Texture: 48) Soil Type: 49) Light Exposure: ® PSH

09/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 Enclosure 2 SITE ID:

Site Classifications Record taxonomic units of the given type(s) if published classifications exist for the area.

CLASSIFICATION TYPE CLASS CODE CLASSIFICATION SHORT NAME CLASSIFICATION SET 50) Existing Veg® 51) Potential Veg 52) Ecotype

Habitat Quality and Management Comments

53) Habitat Description: Plants growing in wet moss on top of large, 40 foot long downed log at edge of riparian area. Plants may also be growing in soil of stabilized gravel bar nearby. 54) Dominant Process: 90 55) Process Comment: 56) Community Quality (L, M, H): H 57) Landscape Integrity (L, M, H): H 58) Disturbance/Threats (present or imminent): If raised the dam pool were raised, most of this population would be submerged. 59) Disturbance/Threats Comment:

60) Non-Native Comment: Few nonnatives present with this species.

61) Current Land Use Comment: Hydroelectric production.

Canopy Cover

Record % canopy cover by actual percent, or by cover class (as indicated in General Information Block). Lifeform Canopy Cover 62) % Cov or Code Ground Cover 63) % Cov or Code Tree 40 Bare Shrub 30 Gravel Forb 75 Rock Graminoid 25 Bedrock Non-vascular Moss 80 Lichen Litter/Duff 20 Algae Basal Veg Water Road surface Lichen SITE ID:

Associated Species

List species directly associated with the EO species on this site. Record the NRCS Plant Code, scientific name or both. If desired, indicate lifeform, dominant species, % cover for each species and flag non-native species.

09/18/2008 Page 2 of 2 Enclosure 2 64) Completeness of Species List: ®* C, R, OR S ® 65) Species List Comment:

66) ® 67) ® 68) 69) 70) 71) NRCS Scientific Name Life Dom. % Cov or Non- Plant Code Form (Y/N) Class native Alnus rubra T Rubus spectabilis S Sambucus racemosa S Ribes bracteosum S Lycopus uniflorus F Fritillaria camschatcensis F Ranunculus flammula F Ranunculus uncinatus F Prenanthes alata F Galium triflorum F Prunella vulgaris F Montia parvifolia F Cornus canadensis S Festuca subulata G Agrostis sp. G

EO Specimen Documentation

72) Reference for ID: 73) Primary Collector – ®Last Name: Beck First Name: Kathryn M.I. A. Other Collectors – ®Last Name: First Name: M.I. 74) Collection #: ®* 201209 75) ID Confirmed: ®* Y: or N: or Questionable: 76) Verification: ® 77) Specimen Repository: ®* SITE ID:

Image Information ® (IF IMAGES TAKEN)

78) Image ID 79) Image Description

09/18/2008 Page 3 of 3 Enclosure 2

Location Information (State, County, Region, Forest, District will be auto-populated by the database application when the spatial feature is entered) 80) USGS Quad Number: 81) USGS Quad Name: 82) Forest Quad Number: 83) Forest Quad Name:

84) Legal Description: Required where public land survey is available. Meridian: Township and Range: T72S R92E S 12 Section:__ Q Sec:___SW QQ Sec: ____ QQQ Sec: ____ QQQQ Sec: ____

85) Latitude and Longitude ®FOR TONGASS (either in degrees, minutes, seconds or in decimal degrees) Geodetic Datum: Latitude: Degrees __ _ N Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ Longitude: Degrees ______W Minutes Seconds __ __.__ __ GPS Datum: GPS Lat. Dec. Degrees: 55.6421 GPS Long. Dec. Degrees: 131.2446

86) UTM® FOR CHUGACH UTM Datum: UTM Zone: Easting: ______358732 Northing: ______6168530

87) GPS Equipment Used (Manufacturer and Model):

88) Metes and Bounds

09/18/2008 Page 4 of 4 Enclosure 2

SITE ID:

89) Directions to Site

Boat up far northeast arm of Swan Lake (22 miles northeast of Ketchikan) until it becomes Lost Creek. Go up Lost Creek to an area with a large gravel bar. Look for 40 foot long mossy log on southeast side of creek. Plants on top of log and possibly in soil of stabilized gravel bar. Use map and GPS points to help locate plants.

90) Sketch of Site or Area

91) General EO Comments

This species was growing on a large, 40 foot long mossy log at the edge of a riparian area. It may also be growing in soil in the riparian area.

09/18/2008 Page 5 of 5 Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Attachment 7 – Location Description of Rare Plant Populations Observed in the Analysis Area

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Version: Revised Final Botany and Wetlands Study Report Southeast Alaska Power Agency

Table A-7. Locations of Rare Plant Populations Observed in the Analysis Area Popu- Location in the Estimated Habitat and relationship to Rare species lation # Analysis Area Population Size inundation zone Northern bugleweed 1 In numerous locations several 100 Population would be affected by (Lycopus uniflorus) around Swan Lake inundation from rising pool reservoir levels. Northern bugleweed 2 In the vicinity of the 20-40 Disturbed wet areas, wet ditched, (Lycopus uniflorus) Dam and along gravel roads. May be affected by Project roads construction, not within inundation zone. Pacific buttercup 1 Gravel bar within Lost 10 Plants growing in wet moss on top of (Ranunculus Creek a large, downed log at the edge of pacificus) riparian area along Lost Creek. Population would be affected by inundation from rising pool reservoir levels.

Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project April 2013 FERC Project No. 2911 Page A7-1 Version: Revised Final