Middle Shuswap River Watershed
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter 12 MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Figure 12-1 . Shuswap River above dam site (Couteau Power Company 1912) 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Facilities The initial plans for a power project at Shuswap Falls had been developed prior to 1912 by the Couteau Power Company based in Vancouver, B.C. The Shuswap Falls generating station, Wilsey Dam and Peers Dam were constructed and owned by West Canadian Hydroelectric Corporation and went into service in 1929. The project consists of impounded storage in Sugar Lake controlled by Peers (Sugar Lake) Dam, and power generation from Wilsey Dam at Shuswap Falls 31 km downstream. The Shuswap Falls project was acquired by the B.C. Power Commission (a predecessor of B.C. Hydro) in 1945. Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-1 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Figure 12-2. Location of Shuswap Falls hydro project Figure 12-3. Wilsey Dam (Water Powers B.C. 1954) Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-2 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Figure 12-4. Brenda Falls in 1920s (BC Archives) Figure 12-5. Sugar Lake Dam (BC Hydro) Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-3 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Specifications about the structures and reservoirs: DAM Peers Wilsey Nameplate capacity (MW) 0 5.2 Dependable capacity (MW) 0 5 Dam function storage diversion Date constructed Date operational 1929 1929 Date reconstructed Height (m) 13 30 Length (m) 98 40 Dam footprint area (m2) Fishway at dam no no Historic anadromous fish presence unconfirmed yes RESERVOIR Sugar Lake headpond Cleared/ not cleared nc n/a Present area (ha) 2217 7 Orig. lake area (ha) 1564 0 Watershed area (km2) Present elevation a.s.l. (m) 601.6 444.5 Normal drawdown range (m) 7.8 max 3 Mean depth (m) 35 Maximum depth (m) 83 30 Storage (million m3) 148 0 Mean water retention time 6 mo. <1 day Mean annual discharge (m3/s) 37 50 DIVERSION - - to powerplant Structure type - - penstocks (140m) Licensed flow (m3/sec) - - 31 Fish flow release (m3/sec) 5 8.5 Mainstem length diminished (km) 0.14 Mainstem length augmented (km) 1.2 Hydrology 1.2.1 Basin and Runoff The Middle Shuswap basin is located in the western ranges of the Monashee Mountains. Sugar Lake is normally fully drafted by March. The Shuswap River begins to rise in April after the winter months of decreased flow, and usually peaks in late May or early June. The runoff regime is dominated by melting of the large winter snowpack. A small amount of glaciation within the watershed does not contribute significantly to the flow regime. Rainfall is a minor contributor to the volume of the annual flow, but can produce large peak flows that lead to spilling (BCH 1994). Reservoir operation tends to delay the onset of spring freshet flows and elevates winter (December-February) flows (Lister 1990). Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-4 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED 1.2.2 Operation and Licensed Diversion Flow Various instream flow requirements are described by Lewis et al. (1996). For protection of the fish resource downstream of Wilsey Dam, a minimum of 300 (8.5 m3/s) must be released at all times, but a local operating order apparently supercedes this and currently allows a minimum release of 15 m3/s. 1.2.3 Habitat Types Flooded by Reservoir Reservoir impoundment raised the elevation of the original Sugar Lake by about 7 m. The reservoir area is 2,217 ha after flooding 653 hectares of land (Figure 12-6). The reservoir shoreline length is now 41 km. The bathymetry of Sugar Lake is shown in Figures 12-7 and 12-8. The headpond behind Wilsey Dam has backwatered about 3.7 km of the incised river channel for an area about 7 ha (Lewis et al. 1996). The GIS calculations done by this study estimated the following losses of fish habitat from the pre-impoundment condition: Sugar Lake Original habitat lost Lake flooded (ha) 1564 Land flooded (ha) 653 Lake shoreline (km) 23 Mainstem: length (km) 7 channel (ha) 65 riparian * (ha) Tributary: length (km) 4 riparian ** (ha) Wetland: (ha) 2 * mainstem riparian zone calculated at 30 m from each bank ** tributary riparian zone calculated at 15 m from each bank Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-5 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-6 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-7 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-8 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED 2. FISH 2.1 Historical and Current Species Presence A list of current fish species within major reaches is presented in Table 12-1. The catastrophic rock slides that blocked Hell’s Gate in the Fraser River Canyon in 1913 and 1914 had a major effect on anadromous runs to the Middle Shuswap River. After much of the initial rock material was removed by March 1915, work was discontinued due to conflicting opinions within the agencies about their passability to fish until another small slide occurred in 1941. Finally, the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission constructed permanent fishways on both banks around Hells Gate between 1944 and 1947 (Roos 1991). During these 32 years, flow conditions at Hells Gate periodically affected the abundance of salmon runs returning to the Shuswap watershed. This legacy may have led to an under-appreciation of salmon stocks using this system during the planning of hydroelectric development. 2.1.1 Downstream of Wilsey Dam The early name for the Middle Shuswap River upstream of Mara Lake was originally the Spallumcheen River (Babcock 1903). Anadromous stocks of chinook, sockeye, pink and coho salmon had access to the entire river below Shuswap Falls but there was at least one point of difficult passage in the river below Mabel Lake. Mabel Lake was classified as non- productive for sockeye on a map of spawning grounds by the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission (IPSFC 1945). 2.1.2 Upstream of Wilsey Dam The original Shuswap Falls were a partial barrier to anadromous fish access; e.g., fishing for chinook salmon near Cherryville was noted in the 1920’s (French 1995), and there was an anecdotal report of sockeye in Sugar Lake (Babcock 1903). The original lower falls (Shuswap) were described as a succession of short drops totalling 12.2 m over a distance of 61 m in a narrow rocky canyon. The original development by the Couteau Power Company in 1913 petitioned to the Chief Inspector of Fisheries against installing a fish ladder at Shuswap Falls costing $20,000 to $25,000 (Mackenzie 1913). Reasons given included the lack of a commercial river fishery, the inaccessibility of the river to sportsmen, the “sheer falls of 38 feet”1 at the outlet of Sugar Lake, the proposed dam height of 70 feet, and the added financial burden to the project. An engineering plan of the proposed Wilsey Dam circa 1920 showed a fish ladder which was never built due to the proposed dam height of 21 m. Since its construction in 1929, Wilsey Dam has blocked upstream access to all anadromous stocks for 71 years. 1 Shotton (1913), a fisheries officer, interviewed the surveyor for the project who told him that the upper [Brenda] falls had a sheer drop of 10 feet at most, and that the rapids section had a total fall of 38 feet in 1100. Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-9 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED Bridge-Coastal Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program 12-10 Volume 2 Revised Jan 06/03: MIDDLE SHUSWAP RIVER WATERSHED In 1977, DFO released 75 adult chinook salmon above Wilsey Dam as a trial. Chinook releases in 1993 and 1995 both resulted in fry that reared in the river above the dam (Triton 1994d; 1995c). The Ministry of Environment has expressed some concerns about effects of salmon transplants on resident salmonids (Jantz 1995). 2.1.3 Upstream of Peers Dam The original Brenda Falls were described as not over 3 m in any one place, and that the series of rapids had a fall of 11.6 m in 335 m (Shotton 1913). 2.2 Impacts on Fish Facility Description of hydroelectric impacts Source g Ne Pos Sugar Lake 2. Reservoir footprint flooded 7 km of mainstem channel x and associated riparian zone, including loss of Sugar Reservoir Lake outlet spawning habitat. 3. Reservoir footprint flooded 4 km of tributary channel x and associated riparian zone: loss of habitats in lower reaches. 4. Original 1564 ha lake was flooded by 7 m to create x x present 2217 ha reservoir: gain of 653 ha in reservoir habitat and uncalculated volume. 5. Fluctuating water levels of 7 m reduced productivity x BC Hydro from shallow littoral habitats: see bathymetric map for 1994 shoal features 6. Fluctuating water levels isolated the shoreline riparian x x zone from the aquatic environment: original lake shoreline was increased from 23 km to 39 km of reservoir shoreline. 2 Peers Dam 7. Dam footprint of __ m : loss of instream, riparian and x upland habitats. 8. Debris booms at Peers Dam has reduced LWD x recruitment to river downstream. 9. Peers Dam has stopped gravel recruitment from Outlet x Cr. to river downstream. 10. Rapid flow changes below Peers Dam have affected x BC Hydro benthic insect production.