J 



INTRODUCTION 



Northern Lights' application to the Montana Department of Natural Resources 

 and Conservation (DNRC) was determined to be inadequate partially because it 

 lacked ecological information on the alternative dam sites specified by the 

 applicant. Without such information, environmental concerns could not be 

 weighed against the economic concerns of the utility company. In order to 

 overcome this limitation, DNRC investigated the fishery aspects of the 

 alternative sites. 



Four dam sites below Kootenai Falls (Katka, Rocky Creek, Ruby Creek, and 

 O'Brien Creek), and one above the falls (the applicants preferred) were 

 considered for this report (see Figure 1). Some of the alternatives would 

 involve the construction of more than one dam. The reservoir elevations of the 

 various alternative dams are shown in Table 1. 



Although several parameters were considered in the comparison, the primary 

 concerns are fish population and movement and the amount of slack water that 

 would be created. 



PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL PARAMETERS 

 WATER QUALITY 



For site-comparison purposes, the water quality information in Northern 

 Lights' application (Northern Lights Inc. 1980) was considered adequate. It is 

 not necessary to repeat that information here. The water quality at all sites 

 is suitable for supporting a cold-water trout fishery. 



-I- 



