PACKWOOD LAKE

PACKWOOD LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT

1965 APPRAISAL
IMPACT ON RECREATION RESOURCES

INDEX

AGENDA

AERIAL VIEW OF PROJECT AND FACILITIES

PART I LAKE LEVEL CONTROL

PART II FISH WATER RELEASE

PART III RECREATION ENHANCEMENT

EXHIBITS

No. 1   Packwood Lake Watershed Map
No. 2   Outlet Weirs
No. 3   Outlet Characteristics
No. 4   1961 Lake Elevation Change Comparison
No. 5   1964 Lake Elevation Change Comparison (Recreation Season)
No. 6   1965 Lake Elevation Change Comparison (Recreation Season)
No. 7   1964 Recorded Lake Elevations
No. 8   1964 Lake Elevations with and without plant (Recreation Season)
No. 9   1965 Recorded Lake Elevations - Year to Date
No. 10 1965 Recorded Lake Elevations - Recreation Season
No. 11 Lake Elevation 50-year average, Maximum & Minimum
No. 12 Report - Dr. William Royce, Fishery Research Biologist
No. 13 Report Supplement - Dr. William Royce
No. 14 Report - Dr. Stanley Gessel, Professor, Forest Soils
No. 15 Report Supplement - Dr. Stanley Gessel
No. 16 Drop Structure Section Drawings
No. 17 Report - Dr. William Royce, Fishery Research Biologist
No. 18 Lake Creek Watershed Map
No. 19 1964-65 U.S.G.S. Record Lake Creek Flows at Drop Structure
No. 20 1964-65 U.S.G.S. Record Lake Creek Flows at Highway Bridge
No. 21 1964-65 U.S.G.S. Record Packwood Lake Elevations
No. 22 Pertinent Provisions of License No. 2244 as Amended.

PACKWOOD PROJECT

1965 APPRAISAL

IMPACT ON RECREATION RESOURCES

A G E N D A

August 18, 1965

John T. Nikko. . . .Chairman

Bureau of Power

Federal Power Commission

8:15 p.m. Assemble at Packwood Community House

Opening Remarks ................... John T. Nikko

Statement of project development
and problems ...................... Owen W. Hurd

Managing Director,
WPPSS

Outline of project development
and problem to be resolved......... Ross Williams, Supervisor

Gifford Pinchot

National Forest

Question and answer period......... Participants

Adjourn

August 19, 1965

9:00 a.m. Assemble at lower portal of Project lower tunnel No. 2 and proceed on foot to Packwood Lake - via pipeline bench route.

12:00 noon Lunch at Lake - Prepared by Resort Operator

1:00 p.m. Tour lake by boat and trails

4:30 p.m. Proceed to cars at Lower Portal of Project Lower Tunnel and return to lodging

Evening Not scheduled

August 20, 1965

John T. Nikko. . . . .Chairman

9:00 a.m. Assemble at Packwood Community House

Opening remarks ................... John T. Nikko

Concluding Statement .............. Owen W. Hurd

Concluding Statement .............. Ross Williams

Concluding Discussion ............. Participants

Summary statement and plans for

any afternoon session ............. John T. Nikko

Adjourn for Lunch

1:00 p.m. Reconvene for further discussion as appropriate

Adjourn

******

The effect on lake elevation of the natural outlet and the existing outlet can be demonstrated by comparing the discharge characteristics of each outlet. Exhibit No. 3 is curves obtained by plotting elevation of the water in each outlet for quantities of water discharge up to 500 cubic feet per second (cfs). The lower curve (No. 1) is the characteristics of the existing drop structure as predicted by model tests and verified by actual U.S.G.S. records. The upper curves No. 2 and No. 3 are obtained from the United States Geological Survey's records of Packwood Lake elevations for the years 1962 and 1963 respectively. The slope of these curves determine the change in lake elevation for a given outflow from the lake. The greater the slope, the higher the lake elevation for a given outflow. It is apparent that for a given outflow, the change in lake elevation will be greater for the natural outlet as compared to the existing outlet.

Exhibits Nos. 4, 5 and 6 have been prepared to demonstrate the greater increase in lake levels for the years 1961, 1964 and 1965 when the outflow is through the natural outlet than when the same flow is over the existing outlet.

Exhibit No. 4 is curves showing lake changes in elevations for outflow occurring in 1961. The upper curve shows the changes in elevation which occur when the outflow is assumed to be routed through the natural outlet, and the lower curve shows changes in elevation when the outflow is routed over the existing drop structure and none through the pipeline or fish water release.

Exhibits No. 5 and No. 6 are similar curves for flows occurring in 1964 and 1965 respectively. Both assume the natural outlet characteristics would be the same as for the 1963 conditions.

It is obvious from these exhibits that the level of Packwood Lake would be stabilized to a greater degree by use of the existing drop structure as compared to the greater changes in lake level elevation that occur when the natural outlet

governs the lake level. The coordinated use of the pipeline and fish water releases would result in even less changes in lake level elevation. For this reason, it can be said that the substitution of the existing outlet for the natural outlet has reduced lake level variations during periods when all outflow is over the drop structure, as compared to natural outlet circumstances. Also, diversion of some portion of the outflow through the pipeline makes it possible to further reduce the lake level changes. The drop structure as constructed has provided an outlet which inherently enhances the lake regulation and aesthetic value of the lake shore.

The project was scheduled for completion early in 1964. However, due to construction delays, the plant was not in operation on a regular basis until August 1964. The plant was first started on an intermittent-test basis in mid-May 1964 and continued until early June, when it was necessary to suspend operations due to need for equipment testing and changes. The annual peak runoffs which occur during June and July were above normal in 1964 and approached the maximum monthly flows of record. For example, the July 1964 average monthly flow was 64 percent greater than the historic July average. During this period, it was necessary for all outflows to pass over the crest of the drop structure (elevation 2858.5 feet Means Sea Level) and/or through the fish water release valve (capacity- 47 cfs).

It was during this period that lake levels reached elevations that flooded shoreline trees and it is speculated that as a result, browning of leaves of some trees occurred which was thought to be due to reduced oxygen supply to roots.

The forty-four year average flow in Lake Creek tabulated by month is as follows:

January	81 cfs	July	153 cfs
February	68 "	August	76 "
March	65 "	September	54 "
April	85 "	October	63 "
May	155 "	November	85 "
June	207 "	December	102 "

Exhibit No. 7 shows in the solid line the actual lake level elevations for the year 1964. The lake level control limits as set forth in the Packwood FPC license are shown by the broken lines. (During the recreation season, the stipulated elevation, by the license, of 2857' M.S.L. has been modified by agreement to permit variations of six inches higher or lower than 2857 feet.) It will be noted that after July 21, lake levels are within the prescribed limits. The drawdown to the lower limit in October was to permit the installation of U.S.G.S. lake level measuring equipment.

Exhibit 8 shows, by the solid upper line, the actual 1964 lake level that existed during the months of May, June and July. Also shown in horizontal dashed lines are the lake level limits as required by the FPC license (within the control of the Licensee). It will be noted that lake levels decreased from May 1 to June 1. This was due to the initial operation of the plant during this period and while inflows were still in flood proportions.

For purposes of comparison and to demonstrate the project's ability, when operating normally, to regulate levels during floods of the 1964 magnitude, we have plotted on Exhibit No. 8 in dotted lines, the lake elevations that would have resulted from the normal operation of the plant on a rule-curve basis. 1/ It is noted that the lake level would have been maintained within the limits stipulated by the license.

Exhibit No. 9 shows by the solid line, the actual lake level elevations for the year 1965 to date. Also shown, as on Exhibit No. 7, are lake level control limits provided for by the license. It will be noted that in late January, the lake level exceeds the license limits for four days. This occurred at the time that much of the Northwest experienced floods that exceeded any previous record. 2/

Exhibit No. 10 depicts lake elevations, also for 1965, but for the flood period which occurred during the recreation season for Packwood Lake - May, June

and July. It will be noted that lake elevations have been and are maintained within variations of less than six inches from May 1 to date this year. This is typical of the operation within limits which will afford maximum protection of shoreline trees made possible by using the plant for lake level regulation.

Exhibit No. 11 is for the purpose of comparing the lake level limits presently set forth in the FPC license, as compared to the limits of historical maximum and minimum lake level variations that have occurred for each day of the months of May, June, July and August for the years 1913 through 1963. It will be noted that the lake level variations permitted by the license are less than, and within, the range of the historical variations that have occurred during the years 1913 through 1963. For this reason, any change in these limits would result in a departure from the pattern of the past fifty years. This exhibit also demonstrates that the 1964 lake levels were not typical of the past, but rather the result of a nonrecurring circumstance caused by failure to complete the plant as scheduled.

Exhibit Nos. 12 and 13 are reports by Dr. William Royce, Fishery Research Biologist, University of Washington, based on studies and observations concerning Packwood Lake and Lake Creek fishing resources during 1964 and 1965. With respect to Lake Level Control, Dr. Royce's following conclusions appear evident:

1. Positive evidences are available to indicate that the 1964 lake level changes were not detrimental to lake trout population.

2. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, and when pertinent factors are considered, lake level fluctuations presently anticipated by project operation under existing license provisions will not adversely effect Packwood Lake trout fishing.

3. The only concern is for loss of fish over the drop structure during periods of peak floods. (This concern can be minimized by rule curve operation during the months of May, June and July as recommended by the Licensee.)

Exhibit Nos. 14 and 15 are reports by Dr. Stanley Gessel, Professor, Forest Soils, University of Washington, pertaining to the effect of lake level control on the shoreline, trees and vegetation with particular reference to the 1964 lake levels. It can be concluded from Dr. Gessel's investigations and report that the means of lake level control as provided by the installed facilities and rule curve operation will afford ample protection for the aesthetic values of shoreline trees and vegetation. Also, that damage to shoreline trees as the result of the 1964 flood conditions and inoperation of the plant during this period was of a temporary nature in most instances and limited to relatively few trees where permanent damage occurred.

Exhibit No. 16 is drawings showing a section of the existing drop structure with its crest at 2858.5 feet Mean Sea Level as constructed and a similar section of the same structure modified to have a crest of 2857.0 feet Mean Sea Level. It should be noted that such a modification will require the removal of the crest cap and its replacement with a similar cap at a lower elevation.

The FPC has requested the Licensee to submit plans and cost estimates for modifying the drop structure to permit the passage of 300 cfs over the drop structure during periods of the recreation season without lake levels exceeding the present crest of 2858.5 feet Mean Sea Level when the plant is inoperable.

Three designs with cost estimates have been submitted to the FPC and to the U. S. Forest Service.

In summary and in view of the foregoing, it is the position of the Licensee that such modifications are not justified since the project as constructed is capable of regulating the level of Packwood Lake adequately for the protection of shoreline trees and vegetation, as has been shown through use of the hydrology charts and through actual plant operation.

As a convenient reference Exhibit No. 22 is excerpts from Packwood Project

License 2244 as amended that are pertinent to Lake Level Control and fish water release and related matters.

FOOTNOTES:

1/ Rule curve operation in this instance means drawing the lake level down to some agreed upon amount, but not lower than 2854 feet Mean Sea Level prior to anticipated or forecasted peak flows.

2/ Evidence of the violence of the Packwood Lake January peak flows can be seen at several places on the east and south shorelines where streams enter the lake.

Effect of Submerged Trees on Fish Habitat

Unquestionably the dead trees which have fallen in the lake around the shores have benefited the fish. The tangle of limbs provides important habitat for young fish where they can escape from their larger relatives and the debris encourages the growth of fish food organisms. Somewhat similar brush shelters have been artificially provided in a number of lakes in order to enhance the environment for fish.

Effect of Reduced Lake Level During Spawning Season on Access to Spawning Streams

The rainbow trout ascend the tributary streams of Packwood Lake during May and June to spawn. During the spawn-taking operations which were conducted by the Washington Department of Game from 1933 to 1940 they were captured by weirs from 10 to 100 yards above the mouths of the streams. The State records show that during most of these years eyed eggs were shipped to other hatcheries from the Packwood station between June 12 and July 27. These probably had been held in the Packwood station for about one month before they were eyed and sturdy enough to ship, and hence it appears that the spawn-taking operations occurred from early May to the latter part of June which would correspond approximately to the spawning period.

The normal level of the lake has been considered to be about 2855 feet. The maximum high water attained under natural conditions was about 2858.5. Usually the lake was near its normal level during the first month of the year and then commonly rose to maxima during May, June and July. Then usually the level decreased with only occasional high water conditions during late autumn or early winter.

Under the conditions of operation by the licensee it is expected that lake level may be reduced to a minimum of 2850.5 during the fall and winter and I understand from Mr. Billingsley that during recent months the lake occasionally has been down to this level.

With low lake levels and flood water conditions in the streams it may be expected that the streams will cut channels down to lake level which are entirely comparable to the channels they occupy immediately above the highest water mark. One need look no further than at the intertidal channels of streams which empty into the ocean to see that this is almost always the case. It should be extremely simple to observe whether this is the case at Packwood Lake and in a remote chance that a stream is spread out in a fashion which makes it difficult for fish to ascend it should be simple to start a channel cutting through the stream delta in a few hours by one man with a hand shovel.

I note further from the U.S.G.S. gauge records for the years 1960-63 that the minimum levels during May and June varied between 5.70 and 5.93 and the maxima between 6.88 and 7.68. Thus it was normal for the lake to vary in level during these two months between 1 and 1.7 feet.

In summary, I believe that it is highly unlikely that changes in lake level during May and June would in any way interfere with access to the spawning streams. If by remote chance it does it could be easily observed and easily corrected.

Sincerely yours,

/s/ William F. Royce

Consultant

WFR:ac

May 1 to September 15. Annual fluctuations on the other hand, will range up to about 8 feet as opposed to historical fluctuations which have been at least 3.4 feet.

Fish populations in the lake: The one species of concern to all those interested in the recreational use of the lake is the rainbow trout. This species has been abundant in the lake for many years. The populations have been maintained by stocking but have been abundant enough in many years, also, to permit taking substantial numbers of eggs. Records from the Department of Game spanning the years 1933 to 1941, 1946 to 1947, and 1950 to 1951, show that annual egg take ranged from 405,000 to 3,021,000. This is a race of rainbows which spawns in May and June. Spawners were collected for egg taking in a number of the tributary streams.

Possible damage caused by fluctuation in lake level: The fears expressed by various people (none of which have been documented) are that changes in lake level may block access to spawning areas during low water in May and June. They cause a loss of feeding areas due to the lowered lake levels or a loss of natural food due to lowering of lake levels. The only concern about high lake levels might be about loss of fish over the drop structure during high water (the intake to the penstock has been screened).

Comments on possible damage: No positive information on damage can be developed until the changes in lake level are actually tried, but a number of considerations indicate that damage is likely to be extremely small.

A prime consideration is the steep slope of most of the lake shores, which results in small exposure or inundation as lake level changes. No pockets occur around the lake which would trap fish and dry up as lake level is lowered and the gradient is such that fish and fish food organisms need move only a few feet to maintain a shallow water habitat. The tributary streams which attract the spawners form beds through any exposed lakeshore area which will be entirely

comparable to the beds above the lakeshore area in gradient and size of bed materials.

Perhaps the best evidence of negligible damage is the good fishing being experienced in July, 1965 after the highs and the lows of the preceding year. The concessionaire at the lake reported that fish were plentiful and appeared to be well fed. Anglers contacted on the lake at this time reported large and in some cases limit catches after only a few hours fishing. Examination of vegetation along lake shore revealed that the freshwater shrimp was abundant.

ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING EFFECTS ON SHORELINE VEGETATION FROM WATER SURFACE FLUCTUATIONS AT PACKWOOD LAKE

by: Stanley P. Gessel

Professor, Forest Soils

Associate Dean, Research

College of Forestry

University of Washington

January, 1965

This statement is being written as a result of discussions with Mr. S. K. Billingsley and Mr. T. R. Malone of the staff of Washington Public Power Supply System, concerning Packwood Lake level fluctuations. I have read the Federal Power Commission's license application information and various statements by interested parties. I was also furnished data on lake levels and water flow from Packwood Lake.

In order to clarify the following discussion, I will first set forth my understanding of the problem under discussion. During the period of June to August, 1965, Packwood Lake was at levels higher than it had been for a considerable number of years. The high level was due to a combination of excess water supply from the heavy 1963-1964 snow pack and construction activities resulting in periods of plant inoperation.

As a result of the higher water levels, some trees surrounding the lake began to show certain signs of distress in the autumn of 1964. As the lake is not far from a wilderness area, any change in vegetation is a cause of public concern.

My purpose in making this statement is to attempt to clarify some of the arguments which have been advanced regarding the effect of change of water level and to propose a course of action which may lead to a solution of any conflicts. I offer these statements as a professional forester who has specialized in forest research and instruction at the University of Washington for the past 10 years. Opinions and facts regarding the effect of water levels on certain forest tree species are based on certain studies at Fern Lake, Lake Whatcom, and greenhouse growth experiments, as well as general field research in the growth of forest trees.

The effect of water immersion of forest trees is largely one of reducing oxygen supply to root systems and thus suffocating trees. It is, therefore, quite obvious that flooding effect is related to physiological condition of the tree and oxygen supply in the water as well as the ability of the tree to provide oxygen through certain root system morphology. Common coniferous species can grow very well in liquid nutrient solutions if the media is properly aerated. Similarly, most forest trees could grow in well aerated water for long periods of time if nutrient supply and aeration is adequate. Others can grow well because of root adaptation. Oregon ash is one example of a tree that can survive flooding.

In relationship to general growth and well being, forest trees carry on two opposing processes -- photosynthesis and respiration. Photosynthesis is concerned with food manufacture through energy capture while respiration is the use of energy for vital life processes. Both of these processes go on in any living tree but with distinct seasonal variation in rates. At one time photosynthesis may predominate while at another respiration may. Rates of both are,

of course, controlled by environmental conditions along with certain species factors. Root systems must supply water and nutrients to the photosynthesizing and respiring plant. Proper oxygen supply is a vital factor in the root functions. The roots are in turn supplied with necessary energy for respiration as well as storage.

In addition to these vital processes, a tree also expands in height, diameter, and crown volume by a process of growth. This consists essentially of cell division and may be expressed in radial growth of a tree trunk, height growth of the stem, or elongation and development of new foliage in all parts of the crown. The roots, of course, also undergo similar growth processes.

Foresters commonly speak of growth then in the sense of height or diameter. In either case there is no direct relationship between these expressions of growth and photosynthetic activity. Growth, as we commonly refer to it, occurs at well defined times of the year, but the period of elongation and radial increase do not parallel each other. Radial increase begins early and extends later in the season than height growth for most species. Both expressions of growth normally take place in the months of May, June, July, August and September in western Washington.

On the other hand, photosynthesis may occur throughout the year, and frequently the greatest net photosynthesis does not take place in the commonly accepted growing season. Local environment factors of air humidity and temperature greatly affect photosynthesis. Respiration is a constantly occurring process but also at different rates depending upon environmental conditions.

Although we do not have many major native forest trees well adapted to high water tables, saturated soils or to long periods of inundation, they do show habitat preferences. Douglas fir, and true fir found at higher altitudes, generally do not grow well in soils which are subject to flooding or long periods of high water table. Western red cedar, red alder, cottonwood, and grand fir, along with Oregon ash are species which can adapt to more water and reduced aeration. Therefore, these latter species are normally found in depressions, on flood plains, and along stream or lake margins. However, they cannot stand long periods of summer flooding, especially with water deficient in oxygen. Because species such as alder and western red cedar are normally found along lake shores and stream deltas, it is only natural to observe that these are the species which may appear to suffer as a result of flooding. This does not mean that they are more susceptible to flooding but only that they usually occupy habitats which can be easily affected by high water.

Remarks which will now be made on the effect of root water environment on tree growth should be related to the preceding discussion. Points will be made in numerical sequence for easier reference.

1. Inundation of root systems of established trees by water of low oxygen content can definitely damage the trees and if continued for periods of one to three months will result in the death of the trees. All of our common forest tree species are susceptible to such injury but there are species differences. Douglas fir is more easily damaged then western hemlock or western red cedar. As far as I can determine, the shoreline of Packwood

Lake is very steep, with the exceptions of inlet delta areas. This means that small changes in water level affects very little land surface and, therefore, relatively few trees and tree root systems. Specific data could be gathered at the time of a field trip to the lake.

2. The extent and severity of the injury is related to the season of inundation and thus, in turn, to other environmental factors and physiology of the tree. It is related to season because oxygen depletion of the water may be greater at one season than another. For example, when other biological activity in the water is at high level, oxygen use is also greater and oxygen content of the water may be lower. The physiological demands of the tree also differ by seasons.

3. Past experience and observations by the author, as well as the meager literature available, indicate that damage to trees by submersion of roots is greater during the active growth, or cell division period. This is probably because the physiological demands of the tree for proper root functions is greater; and, therefore, any reduction in root function is more serious. In other words, a Douglas fir tree can stand a foot of water over its root system for a longer period of time in January than July.

4. Healthy, vigorous trees which have their root systems covered by water do not show serious damaging effect immediately. Trees so covered during cell division periods of June and July may show signs of distress by September, but the true extent of the injury does not become apparent until the following high temperature season when water stress on the tree begins. Trees can go through periods of high humidity and little physiological activity without showing effects of severe stress or injury. Water demands brought on by high temperature and low humidity of a subsequent summer season rapidly indicates the true condition of a tree. Therefore, the true extent of injury brought on by immersion during one growing season will not usually show up until the next season. It is, therefore, difficult to judge which trees may have only minor injury and will recover and which ones may actually die. This has certainly been our experience at Fern Lake where the water level has been permanently raised.

5. It is not unnatural for lake levels to be materially changed by a variety of causes. Landslides, log jams, and beaver dams are some of the common examples. In a given set of circumstances one of these factors has been responsible for several inches to several feet change in lake levels. Flooded trees are killed and a new shoreline is established. One does not have to look far in the Cascade Mountains for many examples of this. In fact, change in level is more natural and normal than a rigidly maintained level. Packwood Lake has itself probably suffered such changes in levels over the past few hundred years. The Licensee notes that they removed a large log jam from the outlet in 1963, which in itself, could have been the cause of major fluctuations in lake level in preceding years.

With these points in mind, I would make the following recommendations:

1. I would suggest that if high water during the growing season of July and August is a factor in the life of trees around the shorelines of Packwood Lake, then

water levels should be reduced in the period of April, May and June. The outflow could be based on the weighted rule curve of the lake. This procedure would allow excessively high runoff such as occurring in 1964 to be stored in the Lake, and thereby reduce root system flooding. The drawdown during this period would have to be consistent with fish propagation requirements.

2. I also believe a program of selectively removing trees around the lake margin which have been killed by high water or have died from any of the many other factors causing the death of forest trees should be initiated. This could be done in a manner which would not disturb the equilibrium of the lakeshore habitat. In this connection it should be remembered that dead trees are a normal component of any lakeshore. I note that over 100 dead trees were observed around the shoreline in both 1960 and 1963. Many of our mountain lakes have large numbers of trees which have died and fallen into the water, as well as standing snags. The standing dead trees add both to the interest of the shoreline, as well as provide a necessary habitat for many birds. Some material in the water, such as trees, also provides shelter for fish, as well as surface area for growth of organisms which serve as fish food. Therefore, I do not believe in the concept which dictates that all lakeshores be managed to give a park-like affect. Certainly open shorelines are not consistent with the wilderness ideal even though some people may object on an aesthetic basis.

3. Definite conclusions regarding the extent of injury, if any, to trees around the shoreline of Packwood Lake, by the 1964 high water, cannot be made until at least June of 1965. I, therefore, propose that an inspection trip, to the lake be planned for late June or July. I would plan to make such a trip. The trip would also serve to bring all interested parties together to discuss apparent management problems and agree on the best solutions. I certainly do not feel capable of offering more definite and realistic comments on this apparent problem until I have been able to visit the lake during the summer season.

/s/ STANLEY P. GESSEL

Stanley P. Gessel, Ph.D.

LAKE LEVEL IMPACT ON SHORELINE TREES AND VEGETATION

Supplement to January 1965 Report

Dr. Stanley P. Gessel

1. (a) As a result of your inspection, what is the general condition of various tree species of Packwood Lake Perimeter?

(b) What is the difference in growth between various species growing on the north and south shorelines of the lake?

(d) Is the present lake level damaging trees on the shoreline?

Answer: (a) On August 3, 1965 I made a rather complete inspection of the shoreline of Packwood Lake. By and large, shoreline vegetation appeared to be in good condition, and most tree species were vigorous as indicated by general appearances of the crowns of trees. In a few places, some trees were either dead or showed evidence of some stress. Around most of the shoreline, these were western red cedar which were near the high water line. Near the inlet delta, a number of red alder and black cottonwood were dead or showing stress. The cause of this condition was not evident, except that some cottonwood had been girdled by beaver.

(b) The general inspection revealed that trees along the south shoreline were suffering more storm damage than those along the north shoreline. Apparently winds sweep through the lake valley and directly strike the south shoreline area, while the north has protection from a mountain mass. Therefore, a number of trees along the south shore have been uprooted or broken by wind action.

(c) The forest around Packwood Lake is quite old, and a wide range of age classes are represented. Some of the old trees are quite decadent and are in various stages of dying. Many cedar trees were observed at varying distances from the shoreline with dead tops. These are quite numerous at the eastern end of the lake. This is a normal characteristic of old growth cedar. Last winter's intense storm also caused extensive damage on some of the small tributaries into the lake. Flood water undercut a number of trees and also caused considerable erosion.

(d) I do not believe that lake levels maintained during the 1965 growing season will have any damaging effect on perimeter vegetation.

2. (a) Based on your observations, what would be the most conducive permanent lake level for recreation and aesthetic purposes?

(b) From an aesthetic and recreation point of view, would a constant lake level be more conducive over a natural fluctuation?

Answer: (a) I believe that a water level of between 2856 and 2857 feet is very desirable for the summer recreation period. This is ideal for recreational activities and also makes for a most attractive lake scene.

(b) I also believe that a relatively constant lake level is more conducive to general recreational uses and aesthetic values than a widely fluctuating lake level. I have seen many lakes on which levels have changed rather abruptly, as a result of natural damming of the outlet by beaver or slides. This invariably results in expanses of dead trees with the establishment of a new shoreline. Low levels caused by evaporation and natural drain-age after high water, frequently expose unsightly areas of shoreline in many lakes. The nature of the shoreline exposure or inundation is, of course, related to the steepness of the shore.

3. (a) What do you consider the current status to be with respect to the state of health of shoreline vegetation and the general aesthetic appearance of the Packwood Lake perimeter?

(b) How do you compare this lake shoreline with other lakes in the area?

Answer: (a) I believe that shoreline vegetation at Packwood Lake is now in a good state of health and have every reason to believe that the condition will be maintained if the lake level stays within the prescribed operating limits. I also think the general aesthetic appearance of the lake is very good.

(b) Packwood Lake compares very well with other lakes in this area of the Cascades. In fact, it is superior to most I have looked at. In the final analysis, each lake must stand alone as a biological and aesthetic entity, and therefore extensive comparisons with other lakes will not gain a great deal.

4. What improvements can the licensee make or cooperate in making to enhance the aesthetic and recreational values of Packwood Lake and the general project area?

Answer: I would suggest that the following improvements should be considered for the Packwood Lake area:

(a) Shelters for hikers at campgrounds.

(b) Improved latrines and waste disposal in campgrounds and also along the main trail. A latrine at the parking lot would be of value.

(d) Improve parking lot area by leveling and control of surface runoff.

(e) Erection of signs in parking lot to explain purpose of project and why area was being used for power generation.

(f) Revegetate and improve the general appearance of some of the construction scars, especially along trail from parking lot to the lake. More planting and seeding this year with appropriate species. Storm damaged area of the upper trail could also be improved.

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

WATER RESOURCES DIVISION

File Number

July 1937 EXHIBIT NO. 20 Washington 14-2260.00

1965

Daily Gage Height, in Feet, and Discharge, in Second-Feet, of LAKE Creek District

At MOUTH, NEAR PACKWOOD, WASH. for the Year Ending September 30, 19 65 Used rating table dated

Drainage Area 26.5 Square Miles. Water-Stage Recorder Stevens continuous Ratio 1 : 6 Gage Read by USGS Engineers Gage heights used to half tenths between and feet;

hundredths below and tenths above these limits.

FPC 2244

1965

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

WATER RESOURCES DIVISION

File Number

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

WATER RESOURCES DIVISION

File Number

July 1937 EXHIBIT NO. 21 Washington 14-2254.00

Elevation

Daily ~~Gage Height~~, in Feet, ~~and Discharge, in Second-Feet~~, of PACKWOOD LAKE District

Near PACKWOOD, WASH. for the Year Ending September 30, 19 65 Used rating table dated

Drainage Area 19.2 Square Miles. Water-Stage Recorder Stevens continuous Ratio 1 : 6 Gage Read by USGS Engineers Gage heights used to half tenths between and feet;

hundredths below and tenths above these limits.

FPC 2244

Daily Gage Height, in Feet, and Discharge, in Second-Feet, of LAKE Creek District

Near PACKWOOD, WASH. for the Year Ending September 30, 19 65 Used rating table dated No. 7 as indicated

Drainage Area 19.2 Square Miles. Water-Stage Recorder Stevens continuous Ratio 1 : 6 Gage Read by USGS Engineers Gage heights used to half tenths between and feet;

hundredths below and tenths above these limits.

scanty, whereas in the intermediate stretches, some plunge basins have been formed by the tumbling waters. Streams with this gradient and with the fluctuating flows which prevail during "normal" conditions are extremely poor for salmon and trout spawning. First, there is almost no gravel small enough for the salmon to dig and made a redd. Second, whatever gravel can be found shifts to destroy the eggs during the period of flood water. I would expect that the reduction in flood water flows and the subsequent increase in fine materials in the streambed would enhance the possibility of successful spawning.

The high water flows during early summer also inhibit the habitat for trout. Streams with such a high velocity and such poor pool areas as those in the lower end offer the trout little resting space and are generally poor fishing streams. A majority of the anglers which were contacted and which expressed opinions about the former quality of fishing in Lake Creek estimated that it was poorer than other neighboring streams and that the fish were generally small.

The low flow in the lower part of Lake Creek under operating conditions cannot be less than about 8 cfs, much of which would enter the creek within the mile next to the lake. There is evidence of substantial seeps through the unsolidated material near the drop structure and a major spring carrying about 3 cfs during dry weather enters Lake Creek within a mile of the lake. This amount of water would fill the pools throughout the entire creek and in all likelihood would provide better fish habitat than the torrential stream which prevails during the early summer under "normal" conditions.

POSSIBLE METHODS OF IMPROVING ANGLING

Packwood Lake: Maximum production from trout spawning should be sought by removal of old fish traps which were used to obtain spawners and some of which were left to become permanent stream blocks.

The sustained egg take for many years from Packwood Lake indicates that a large part of this population was nonmigratory and should sustain substantial fishing pressure. If fishing declines, and improved access to the spawning grounds does not help enough, then stocking is the only way in which additional fishing could be provided.

Lake Creek: Apparently Lake Creek now serves as a late summer habitat for rainbows from the Cowlitz River when the Cowlitz River is so turbid and cold. Substantial artificial improvement in pool habitat might be feasible for rather little cost in lower sections of the creek and might be reasonably stable under the new flow regime.

Spawning conditions for trout and salmon will improve with decrease in velocity, increase in bed stability and reduction in size of bed materials. The reduction of average flow during the spawning season will decrease velocity, the minimization of flood flows will increase bed stability and probably permit some decrease in size of bed materials. It may be possible to enhance spawning conditions as well as habitat for trout by some artificial changes in the stream bed. The feasibility of this will require further study of flows experienced and the possibility of excavating pools.

William F. Royce

August 8, 1965

This request has been predicated on the following conclusions:

1. A reduction of the amount requested will not adversely effect resident trout or trout fishing in Lake Creek.

2. The reduction requested will not adversely effect spawning areas in the Cowlitz River at its confluence with Lake Creek.

3. Reductions of releases to about 2 cfs would be adequate for supplying water from Packwood Lake to meet the needs of Lake Creek resident trout.

4. Although we have not requested a reduction during the recreation season, it is recognized that a reduction in water released from Packwood Lake to Lake Creek during the summer months will reduce the Lake Creek water temperature and thereby enhance the environment for resident trout. (Recent temperature measurements on July 31 and August 1, 1965, taken a short distance downstream from the drop structure of Lake Creek, the water registered 68° F, whereas the inflow of streams into Lake Creek at its upper end was 44° F. Below the first major Lake Creek tributary (Tunnel Creek) the water temperature of Lake Creek was 60° F.)

5. The value of power produced by the reduction in fish water released in the amount proposed, creates a demanding incentive to do so promptly in the absence of any known adverse effects. (See Footnote 1/)

The foregoing conclusions are supported by the report on "Effect of Changes in Flow on Fishing on Lake Creek" of Dr. Royce, Fishery Research Biologist, Exhibit No. 17.

On an inspection trip by WPPSS staff members on July 31 and August 1, the following observations were made with regard to conditions and circumstances which support the soundness and prudence of reducing the amount of fish water releases without delay. (See Exhibit No. 18 "Lake Creek Watershed Map")

1. About 8,000 feet below the drop structure on Lake Creek, it was observed that seepages from the banks and streams entering the Lake Creek on both sides were contributing an estimated 5 to 7 cfs to the stream flow.

2. Additional tributary streams add to the volume of Lake Creek with the result that more than 23 cfs was recorded on the USGS gauge at the highway bridge crossing Lake Creek on August 1, 1965, which is 2 - 3 times the amount of Lake Creek inflow from Packwood Lake.

3. Water temperatures of entering streams was 44° F as compared to 68° F for water releases from Packwood Lake.

4. The mixed water below Tunnel Creek (about 9000 feet below the drop structure) was 60° F reflecting the cooling effect of the tributary streams and indicating that local inflow above that point at 44° F was equal to 1/2 of the 68° F drop structure release of 10 cfs.

5. The nature of the stream flow has resulted in a series of numerous pools and plunge basins, of greater depth at their upper ends and of adequate depth for fish protection.

6. Due to the nature of the pools, only a very small flow is necessary to maintain pool depth.

7. Numerous log jams occur at frequent intervals throughout the major portion of Lake Creek, particularly in the Middle Reach.

8. Several falls exist, varying between 10 and 38 feet in height. Many other smaller falls exist, all of which limits trout migration.

9. Very little evidence exists that any fishing takes place for the greater part of the length of Lake Creek. This is verified by the results of efforts made by WPPSS to survey the amount of fishing in Lake Creek.

10. The extreme difficulties presented by the narrow canyon, huge boulders, frequent log jams, and the inaccessibility of most of the stream, not only discourages fishing, but also makes travel along the stream and egress and ingress very hazardous.

11. Log jams, landsliding and deposits of debris has no doubt been greatly increased as a result of the January 1965 flood. The severe winter storm on January 29 and 30 resulted in an average flow of 1100 cfs on January 30, 1965. The gauge peak recordings show a peak flow of 1400 cfs which is near the flood of record for Packwood Lake.

The following is a tabulation of monthly average flows of Lake Creek during the past 12 months taken from U.S.G.S. records for (1) the amount of water released from the drop structure, and (2) the inflow to Lake Creek between the drop structure and Highway bridge, and (3) the flow as measured near the Highway Bridge near Packwood.

LAKE CREEK AVERAGE MONTHLY FLOWS

CUBIC FEET PER SECOND (cfs)

Month	Discharge at Drop Structure Column 1	Local Inflow Column 2	Discharge at Highway Bridge Column 1 plus 2
August 1964	17.3 cfs	56.5 cfs	73.8 cfs
September	10.2	40.3	50.5
October	13.8	9.0	22.8
November	10.4	21.1	31.5
December	20.5 (a)	72.3(a)	92.8
January 1965	49.5 (a)	91.8(a)	141.3
February	27.4	55.1	82.5
March	11.9	28.7	40.6
April	12.0	23.8	35.8
May	14.6	25.3	39.9
June	20.4	22.5	42.9
July	11.2	14.9	26.1

NOTE a: Flow records from licensee records due to USGS gauge damage.

Exhibit 19 is an unpublished record of gauge height and resulting Lake Creek flows as measured at the USGS gauging station, a short distance below the drop structure for the period October 1, 1964 through August 1, 1965, incl.

Exhibit 20 is a similar record of gauge height and Lake Creek flows as measured at the USGS station, a short distance above the Highway Bridge north of Packwood for the same period.

Exhibit 21 is USGS record of Packwood Lake elevation for each day for the period October 1, 1964 to August 1, 1965, inclusive.

FOOTNOTE 1/ Demand billing represents a sizeable portion of Packwood Project revenue. The amount of project capacity used for demand purposes depends partially upon the amount of energy Packwood can produce during the "critical" period. The critical period being a recurrence of the September 1, 1936 through April 15, 1937 Columbia River Flows.

Fishwater release quantities which are required to bypass the drop structure, must be deducted from the amount of flow that would have been available for critical period generation.

For purpose of comparison, the tabulation below shows the recorded monthly flows for the 1936 - 1937 critical period and the percentage decrease caused by a 10 cfs fishwater bypass.

Critical Month	Year	Average Recorded Flow cfs	Percentage decrease in Generation caused by 10 cfs Bypass
September	1936	43.5	23.0
October	1936	30.9	32.3
November	1936	21.5	46.5
December	1936	49.4	20.2
January	1937	32.8	30.5
February	1937	31.2	32.1
March	1937	40.2	24.9
April (1-15)	1937	63.4	15.8

TOTAL		37.0 cfs	27.0 pct

It, therefore, results that the project participants annually lose credit for 27 pct of the critical period exchange capacity otherwise available for demand billing.

Foot Note 1/

WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM

Packwood Lake Hydroelectric Project

Accumulated Costs to Date Chargeable to Recreational

Enhancement and Protection

FPC Account No.	Description	Total Project Costs	Amounts Chargeable to Recreation. . .
330.31	Log Bridge at Lake	$4,384	$4,384
332.923	Tailrace Canal	465,680	349,260
332.424	Traveling Fish Screens	50,032	50,032
332	Fish Water Release	24,642	24,642
332.435	Stop Log System	23,494	11,747
332.42-439	Intake Structure	140,108	42,032
32	Other Misc. Items Related to 332 – includes USGS gauging, services of consultants, etc.	46,810	23,405
335.311	Emergency Telephone System to Lake	114,469	22,894
336.1	Forest Service Trail	72,200	72,200
336-Bal.	Access Road, Parking Lot, Road Bridges, etc.	440,662	330,497
	Total	$1,382,481	$931,093

RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF LICENSE NO. 2244, AS AMENDED CONCERNING LAKE LEVEL CONTROL, FISH WATER RELEASE AND RELATED MATTERS

I. Order Amending License, February 23, 1962

1. "The Commission finds:

* * *

"(5) The following described revised exhibits filed as part of the application for amendment conform to the Commission's rules and regulations and should be approved as part of the license for the project as hereinafter provided:

* * *

"Exhibit L: (FPC Nos. 2244-74 through - 76)"

(Note: These exhibits show the present drop structure design. The height of the drop structure, however, was placed at 2858.5, instead of 2857, as shown on these drawings, in conformity with FPC instructions and Art. 37 of the amended license.)

2. "The Commission orders:

"(A) The exhibits described in finding (5) above as conforming to the Commission's rules and regulations are approved as part of the license for Project No. 2244 . . ."

3. "Article 27. The Licensee shall construct, maintain and operate such protective devices and shall comply with such reasonable modifications of the project structures and operation in the interest of fish and wildlife resources, provided that such modifications shall be reasonably consistent with the primary purpose of the project, as may be prescribed hereafter by the Commission upon its own motion or upon recommendation of the Secretary of the Interior or the Washington Department of Fisheries and Game or the Forest Service, after notice and opportunity for hearing and upon a finding that such modifications are necessary and desirable and consistent with the provisions of the Act: Provided further, that subsequent to approval of the final design drawings prior to commencement of construction no modifications of project structures in the interest of fish and wildlife resources which involve a change in the location, height or main structure of a dam, or the addition of or changes in outlets at or through a dam, or a major change in generating units, or a rearrangement or relocation of a powerhouse, or major changes in a spillway structure shall be required."

4. "Article 37. The Licensee shall operate the project so that the maximum operating pool shall be at elevation 2858.5 and the minimum operating pool shall be elevation 2850.5. During the period each year between May 1 and September 15, the Licensee shall maintain the pool level at elevation 2857, except for conditions which may occur which are beyond the control of the Licensee."