Comprehensive Conservation Plan Summary Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge

              Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Summary
Kanuti
National Wildlife Refuge
U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceThe comprehensive conservation plan details program planning levels that are substantially greater than current budget allocations and, as such, is for strategic planning and program prioritization purposes only. This plan does not constitute a commitment for staffing increases or funding for future refuge-specific land acquisitions, construction projects, or operational and maintenance increases.
Front cover photograph: Steve Hillebrand, USFWS. Beaver, or “noye’e” in Koyukon Athabascan, are common throughout Kanuti Refuge.
Back cover photograph: Steve Hillebrand, USFWS. Short-tailed weasel, called “koghozene” in Koyukon Athabascan.1
Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
for the
Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge
Summary
September 2008
Prepared by:
Region 7
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Refuge Manager
Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge
101 12th Ave, Rm 262
Fairbanks, AK 99701-6237
(907) 456-0329
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Conservation, Planning & Policy
1011 E. Tudor Road, MS 231
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
(907) 786-3357
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
If you have any questions or comments about this plan, please contact us at one of the
following locations:
2
The Mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System
The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is to administer a national
network of lands and waters for the conservation, management
and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant
resources and their habitats within the United States for the
benefit of present and future generations of Americans.
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
The Purposes of Kanuti Refuge
The major purposes include:
“...(i) to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity including,
but not limited to, white-fronted geese and other waterfowl and migratory birds, moose, caribou
(including participation in coordinated ecological studies and management of the Western Arctic
caribou herd) and furbearers;
(ii) to fulfill the international treaty obligations of the United States with respect to fish and wildlife
and their habitats;
(iii) to provide, in a manner consistent with the purposes set forth in subparagraphs (i) and (ii), the
opportunity for continued subsistence uses by local residents; and
(iv) to ensure, to the maximum extent practicable and in a manner consistent with the purposes set
forth in paragraph (i), water quality and necessary water quantity within the refuge.”
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980
The Mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with
others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and
their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.
3
Contents
Introduction to the CCP
Refuge Description
Location
Establishment
Planning Procedures









Requirements
The Planning Process
Refuge Assets










Biological Resources









Human Uses








Special Values
Refuge Vision










Issues











What are Issues?









Kanuti Refuge Issues







How does the Refuge address the Issues?
Alternatives
Kanuti Refuge Management
Fish, Wildlife, and Habitat Management
Fire Management
Subsistence Management
Predator Management
Biological Integrity Policy
Public Use
Access
Refuge Infrastructure and Administration
Climate Change









Management Categories Table
Refuge Goals and Objectives








Goal 1











Goal 2











Goal 3











Goal 4











Goal 5











Goal 6
Funding and Personnel Requirements






Implementation and Monitoring
Step-down Plans









Partnership Opportunities








Monitoring and Evaluation








Plan Amendment and Revision








Wild North Photography/USFWS
4
5
55
6
67
8
889
12
12
12
13
14
15
18
19
19
19
20
20
21
21
21
22
23
31
31
35
36
37
38
39
40
42
42
44
45
45
Introduction to the CCP
What are comprehensive conservation plans (CCP)?
Comprehensive conservation plans (CCPs) guide overall refuge
management. They ensure that management actions and refuge uses comply
with the purposes for which a refuge was established and with other legal
mandates such as the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System. They
define long-term goals and objectives toward which refuge management
activities are directed.
Why do we update CCPs? The Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980 as amended directs us, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, to prepare, and from time to time, to revise a
comprehensive conservation plan for each refuge in Alaska. This document is
a summary of the 2008 revision of this plan. This CCP will provide direction
for management of Kanuti Refuge for the next 15 years.
Revising the CCP allowed us to:
• update management guidelines according to national and regional
policies and Federal laws concerning refuge management;
• incorporate new scientific information on refuge resources;
• reevaluate current refuge management guidelines based on
changing public demands for the use of the refuge and its
resources;
• ensure that all interested parties have an opportunity to
participate in the development of management guidelines;
• establish broad management guidelines for refuge programs and
activities;
• provide continuity in refuge management;
• provide a basis for budget requests; and
• provide a basis for evaluating accomplishments.
Wild North Photography/USFWS
4
5
Refuge Description
Location
Kanuti Refuge covers 1.6 million acres and lies on the
Arctic Circle nearly 150 miles northwest of Fairbanks
between the Brooks Range and the Ray Mountains. It is
part of a broad basin formed by the Koyukuk and Kanuti
rivers. The refuge extends from 65 degrees 59 minutes to
66 degrees 53 minutes north latitude, and from 150 degrees
58 minutes to 152 degrees 58 minutes west longitude.
The lands and waters within the refuge are linked to the
Bering Sea through the Koyukuk River, which drains into
the Yukon River and then into the Bering Sea. The Dalton
Highway and Alyeska Pipeline lie within eight miles of the
eastern boundary. Elevations range from 500 feet to over
3,000 feet.
Establishment
In 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
(ANCSA) was passed to settle Alaska Native land claims.
Section 17 (d)(2) of ANCSA required that the Secretaries
of Interior and Agriculture propose to Congress the
designation of national parks, refuges, forests, wilderness,
and wild and scenic river systems in Alaska. Official agency
proposals and final environmental impact statements (EIS)
were completed in 1974.
Following controversy and congressional debates,
President Jimmy Carter signed into law the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) on
December 2, 1980. Section 302 of this act established
Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge as part of the National
Wildlife Refuge System.
Kanuti Refuge is in close proximity to the Dalton
Highway Corridor which includes the Alyeska Pipeline.
During some winters, depending on snow and ice
conditions, supplies can be transported to Bettles on a
winter road.
6
Lichen on birch tree
Great Gray Owls breed on the refuge.
Planning Procedures
Requirements
We are required by ANILCA to identify and describe:
• populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the
refuge;
• special values of the refuge;
• areas within the refuge suitable for use as administrative sites or
visitor facilities;
• present and potential requirements for access; and
• significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and
habitats of fish and wildlife.
ANILCA further requires that in each CCP we:
• designate areas within the refuge according to their resources and
values;
• specify the programs for conserving fish and wildlife within each
such area;
• specify the uses within each such area that are compatible with the
purposes of the refuge; and
• present opportunities which will be provided within the refuge
for fish and wildlife-oriented recreation, ecological research,
environmental education, and interpretation of refuge resources and
values.
Wild North Photography/USFWS Chris Harwood/USFWS
Bill Raften/USFWS
The Kanuti River, called Kk’oonootne in Koyukon Athabascan, exhibits
stunning fall colors.
Kanuti River
7
The Planning Process
CCPs follow a process guided by
planning requirements identified
in ANILCA, the National Wildlife
Refuge Improvement Act, the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service policies. In this process we:
Publish draft plan and environmental
assessment
Ask public to review
Ask public for their ideas
Identify planning issues
Develop goals, objectives, and
alternatives to address the issues
Analyze impacts of and compare
alternatives
We are here
Make decision and publish
final plan
Preplan and design the
planning process
Analyze and address
public comments
Implement the plan and
monitor and evaluate it
Review and revise the plan
Done: 2004
Done: 2004
Done: 2005
Done: 2006
Done: 2007
Done: 2007/08
Done: 2008
Starting: 2008
Starting: 2023
or earlier if
necessary
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Biological Resources
The refuge contains prime examples of Alaska’s boreal forest ecosystem
where black and white spruce, birch, and poplars are interspersed with
lakes, wetlands, and open areas. The landscape is primarily shaped by fire,
ice, and flooding. The refuge is home to a variety of wildlife, fish and plants
that interact much as they did thousands of years ago. It provides natural
lands and waters for breeding birds including ducks, geese, swans, loons,
and other migrants. It provides habitat for moose, caribou, wolves, bears,
beaver, muskrat, and other mammals. Rivers and seasonally flooded streams
are home to several fish species among which are salmon, arctic grayling,
and whitefish.
Human Uses
There are no permanent roads or residences within the refuge. Access for
visitors is limited by pathless terrain and rivers that are challenging to
travel. We estimate that fewer than 20 non-local visitors use the refuge
each year. They primarily access the refuge by airplanes equipped with
floats or skis. The primary users of Kanuti Refuge are local residents of
the four communities closest to the refuge: Allakaket, Alatna, Bettles, and
Evansville. Access from the road system to these communities is mainly by
commercial aircraft. Boats and snowmobiles are frequently used for local
travel. About 250 people, the majority of whom are Koyukon Athabascan
and Kobuk Nunamiut, live in these communities. Local residents live
a partial subsistence lifestyle, relying on natural resources like moose,
caribou, salmon, whitefish, ducks, and geese.
8
An Allakaket resident harvests chum
salmon on the Koyukuk River.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Wild North Photography/USFWS
Wild North Photography/USFWS
Refuge Assets
Beaver or noye’e in Koyukon
Athabascan are abundant on Kanuti
Refuge. They play a vital role in
shaping the environment.
The climate is continental and temperatures can range from over 90 degrees
Fahrenheit in summer to minus 70 degrees Fahrenheit in winter.
9
Special Values
According to ANILCA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is required
to identify and describe “special values” of the refuge. Refuge staff has
determined the following features of the refuge to be of special value:
• Kanuti Canyon, a scenic stretch of the Kanuti River cutting through
cliffs up to 400 feet high;
• the remote and essentially pristine character of the refuge, providing
outstanding opportunities for people seeking solitude in their
wilderness experience;
• the Hulgothen Bluffs, potentially containing numerous Pleistocene
fossils;
• the subsistence way of life which is still actively practiced by many
local residents, providing people with a livelihood which affects
kinship, group cohesion as well as personal identity;
• cultural resources such as pre-Athabascan and Athabascan sites and
remnants of turn-of-the-century mining activities; and
• Sithylemenkat Lake, with its sand beaches and rocky outcrops, one of
the most scenic areas within the external refuge boundaries.
The Kanuti Canyon, or Kk’oonootne Tlaalooł Yeet, which means “in the throat
of rocks or canyon” in Koyukon Athbascan, can be difficult to pass during
low water or during extreme high water. South-facing sides of the canyon are
warm and dry in summer and contain plant and bird communities not found
elsewhere on the refuge.
The refuge receives very little
visitation due to its remoteness and
inaccessibility, which provides unique
opportunities for those seeking a remote
wilderness experience and solitude.
Waterfowl are a highly valued
subsistence resource, particularly in
the spring when fresh fowl provide a
welcome change in diet.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Luke Smithwick/USFWS Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
10
The new part of Allakaket was built on
higher ground after severe flooding in
August 1994 washed away part of the
city.
Buildings of the old City of Allakaket
along the shore of the Koyukuk River
(Kk’uyetl’ots’ene) are prone to flooding
during break-up in the spring.
Allakaket (Alaakkaakk’et, which means
“the mouth of the Alatna River”) is
located along the Koyukuk River at
its confluence with the Alatna River.
The old part of Allakaket lies on the
shore of the river. Allakaket is mainly a
Koyukon Athabascan village.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
11
The village of Evansville (left) and the
City of Bettles (right) are two adjoining
communities along the Koyukuk River
between the Wild and John rivers.
They are located three miles north of
the refuge boundary (which intersects
VOR Lake, the float plane base for the
refuge in Bettles and pictured in the
background).
The village of Alatna is named
after the river of the same name
and includes mainly descendents of
Kobuk River Nunamiut Eskimos.
Allakaket can be seen on the east
bank of the Koyukuk River, opposite
its confluence with the Alatna River.
Both communities lie just a couple of
miles west of the external boundary
of the refuge.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Kanuti wetlands. Photo by Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
The nearest road-based community is
Coldfoot on the Dalton Highway,
40 miles northeast of the refuge.
Kanuti staff represent the Service
and the Kanuti, Arctic, and Yukon
Flats National Wildlife Refuges at
the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center
in Coldfoot. An average of 8000
visitors stop by annually.
Howard C. Anderson/http://www.astroshow.com
12
Refuge Vision
Wild North Photography/USFWS
Issues
What are Issues?
In the context of the CCP we define an issue as any unsettled matter,
such as an initiative, opportunity, resource management problem, threat
to refuge resources, conflict in uses, public concern, or presence of an
undesirable resource condition that requires a management decision.
To identify issues of importance to the public, we collected comments
at meetings, in response to planning updates, and through visits with
community elders and leaders. Issues were also identified based upon
concerns by Fish and Wildlife Service staff.
We initially identified a broad range of topics that became more focused as
more information was gathered. Issues identified during the first round of
public involvement were refined and clarified during later rounds.
Several issues were raised that were outside the scope of this revision
process, and thus are not treated in the plan. Issues outside the scope of
the plan include those a) already addressed by existing laws and policies,
b) outside the scope of refuge management, and c) addressed similarly
regardless of the management alternative selected.
Animal tracks along Sithylemenkat
Lake
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
13
Kanuti Refuge Issues
We encountered two significant issues that were considered in the plan.
These were incorporated into the management alternatives we developed
and presented in the draft plan.
Issue 1: Conservation of the Natural, Unaltered Character of the Refuge.
Many people expressed desire that the refuge remain in a natural, wild state.
They wanted minimal intrusion on natural systems and for the refuge to
remain wild for the future. Wild character can mean a place of solitude where
a visitor might not expect to encounter another human during the course of
a visit. It can also mean the absence of roads, trails and towns or villages.
The Kanuti Refuge is one of the few refuges in Alaska that is both roadless
and without communities inside its boundaries. These characteristics
help to maintain the wild character of Kanuti Refuge. Following are some
representative comments:
“It is best to keep it wild.”
“We want the country to stay the same for the next generations.”
“We make our livings off the rivers.”
“Your 15-year focus should be on preservation and conservation in a balance
that will keep this place remote and isolated for the years to come.”
“I would like to see you keep Kanuti wild with minimum facilities. Have
something for visitors in Bettles but not on the refuge. Wildlife should come
first. Isn’t that why the refuge was established?”
“Take a long look and include the refuge in the wilderness system.”
“I would like to see you have the opportunity to give Kanuti wilderness
protection and status. These bio-reserves where ecological processes are
still allowed to shape the environment have important implications for the
world...Protecting the habitat should have the highest priority for planning
for the refuge; it is more important than hunting, although there should
always be a balance between consumptive and non-consumptive use…limit
recreational activities when necessary; protection of the land and wildlife
should be the number one priority.”
Issue 2: Acceptance and Integration of New Management Policies and Guidelines
into the Plan.
This issue came from within the Fish and Wildlife Service. The new
management policies and guidelines were developed as part of the Alaska-wide
refuge comprehensive planning effort. These policies and guidelines will
ensure that refuge management actions are consistent throughout Alaska.
USFWS
Wild North Photography/USFWS
The stretch of the Kanuti Kilolitna
River (Kk’oonootne Kk’eeyh
Degheleetne) where it enters the
refuge, epitomizes the fundamental
qualities of wilderness.
Winter scenery on Kanuti Lake (Kk’oonoo Benkk’e)
14
How does the Refuge address the Issues?
ANILCA requires us to designate areas within a refuge according to their
resources and values and to specify programs and uses within those areas.
To meet this requirement, Minimal, Moderate, and Intensive Management
categories were established as part of the Alaska-wide planning effort.
For each management category, appropriate activities, public uses, com-mercial
uses, and facilities were identified. Only the Minimal and Moderate
Management categories apply to Kanuti Refuge. Minimal Management
maintains the natural environment with very little evidence of human-caused
change. Moderate Management allows actions and uses that may
result in temporary or permanent changes to the natural environment but
are small in scale and do not disrupt natural processes.
Issue 1: Conservation of the Natural, Unaltered Character of the Refuge.
A majority of the refuge (86 percent) will be designated as Minimal Man-agement
to preserve the refuge’s wild character. Portions of the refuge
(14 percent) in the north and west will remain or become designated as
Moderate Management.
Issue 2: Acceptance and Integration of New Management Policies and
Guidelines into the Plan.
The new Management, Policies, and Guidelines for National Wildlife
Refuges in Alaska are governed by Federal laws (i.e., the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 and ANILCA), by regulations
implementing these laws, by treaties, by Service policy, and by principles
of resource management. All these establish standards for resource
management or limit the range of potential activities that may be allowed
or authorized in the different management categories on refuges.
The regional management policies and guidelines described in Appendix J
in the full document were developed as common management direction
for national wildlife refuges in the Alaska Region of the Fish and Wildlife
Service. These policies and guidelines are essentially the same for all of
the refuges in this region.
The Kanuti Flats (left) provide a wide
variety of wetland habitats for nesting
waterbirds. The intervening uplands
offer diverse vegetation ranging from
dwarf shrub to coniferous and deciduous
forest and are inhabited by numerous
songbird species.
The Blackpoll Warbler is on the list of
“Species of Special Concern” for the
State of Alaska.
Green-winged Teal (k’etsutl) are one of
the most common ducks on the Refuge.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
USFWS Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
15
Alternatives
Federal law required that we develop a range of reasonable alternatives. Alternatives represent different manage-ment
options for future actions. They are different ways to respond to issues, management concerns, and opportuni-ties.
Each of the three Alternatives we presented in the draft plan was developed with the Refuge System mission
and the refuge’s purposes in mind.
Our first Alternative A (“no action”) was legally required and presented no difference from the Management Alter-native
in the 1987 plan. It designated 67 percent of the refuge within Minimal Management and 33 percent within
Moderate Management. The second Alternative (B) put all federal lands within the refuge boundary in Minimal
Management. Our third and preferred Alternative (C) designated 85 percent of the refuge as Minimal Management
and the remainder of the refuge along and north of the Koyukuk River as Moderate Management.
The Alternatives we presented in the draft plan generated a number of public comments. Generally, local residents
and community leaders preferred that refuge lands adjoining private lands near their communities be in the Moder-ate
Management category. Conversely, non-locals preferred to see more of the refuge in the Minimal Management
category.
Refuge manager Mike Spindler presenting the draft CCP to the Fairbanks
Chamber of Commerce in July 2007.
Christopher Harwood/USFWS
Discussion of the draft CCP with Kanuti Refuge staff and members of the
communities of Allakaket and Alatna in April 2007.
Deborah Webb/USFWS
Of the commenters who preferred a
particular Alternative a majority indi-cated
that they preferred Alternative
B because the entire refuge would be in
Minimal Management. Slightly fewer
commenters preferred Alternative C.
People commented that they liked the
flexibility of what may be allowed in
Moderate Management, and one noted
that although he/she preferred Minimal
Management, the mixture of federal and
private land warranted Moderate Man-agement.
A few additional comments
suggesting changes to Alternative C
were mixed, with some people wanting
more Minimal Management and others
wanting more Moderate.
As a result of these comments we
modified, and have adopted, a version
of Alternative C (see maps on next
two pages).
We believe that this alternative
strikes a balance in maintaining the
wild character over the majority of
the refuge while allowing for more
intensive human uses in areas near
the communities.
1617
Below: The preferred Alternative C as presented in the 2007 draft plan. 18
Wild North P{hotography/USFWS
Trumpeter Swan taking off from a
frozen lake.
Adam Kokx/USFWS
Sundew (Drosera rotundifolia)
is a carnivorous plant. It attracts
insects with its red glandular hairs
which are covered in a sugary sticky
substance. It is often found in bogs
and marshes.
Kanuti Refuge Management
Management of Kanuti Refuge will generally continue to follow the same
course of action that it has previously. The new vision statement and goals
(see page 31), developed specifically with low impact management as
philosophy, will be incorporated. The regional management direction (see
page 23 and Appendix J in the full document) will be incorporated.
Refuge management will strive to maintain the ecological integrity of
the refuge with little evidence of human-caused change. Disturbances
to resources from public uses, economic activities, and facilities will be
minimized. Habitats will generally be allowed to change and function
through natural processes. Because activities that could have been
allowed under Moderate Management in the previous plan of 1987 were
never implemented, the public will see little or no change from the existing
situation despite changes in land classification.
Pages 19-22 present a summary of Kanuti Refuge management followed
by a management categories table which introduces specifics of the
regional management direction relevant to Kanuti Refuge.
Habitat management within the refuge largely includes inventory and
monitoring of vegetation biodiversity.
USFWS
19
Firewood is an important resource
for people in the communities
surrounding the refuge.
Wild North Photography/USFWS
Fish, Wildlife, and Habitat Management
Management will focus on understanding and monitoring natural systems
rather than manipulating system components. Active management will
emphasize protecting systems, such as removing non-native plant species
mainly using manual treatments. Chemicals may be used in accordance with
policy and regulations if there are no other feasible techniques available.
Fire Management
The primary objectives of fire management on Service lands are to conserve,
protect, or enhance habitats and to maintain ecosystems for the benefit of fish
and wildlife. Additionally, fire management activities must meet the goals
of protecting human health and safety and protection of structures. Fire
management activities on the refuge include research, preparedness, wildland
fire suppression, wildland fire use (where natural ignitions are allowed to
burn for resource benefits), prescribed fire, outreach, eduction, monitoring,
and prevention and enforcement of fire trespass. Fire management options
range from “Limited Suppression” where fires are allowed to burn to benefit
wildlife habitat, to “Modified Suppression,” to “Full Suppression” where
most fires are suppressed. All of these management options could be applied
in either of the Minimal or Moderate Management categories. ANILCA
requires that we manage the refuge for its natural diversity, including wildlife
and habitat. In the next 10-15 years we will manage fire both as a natural
process that is essential in maintaining the natural variety of vegetational
development stages typical of Kanuti and interior Alaska, and also to
maintain a higher proportion of habitats at the older end of the post-burn
vegetation succession spectrum. The latter will allow vegetation within a
specially designated area (290,000 acres in the center of the refuge southeast
of Allakaket) to recover from earlier fires and will favor wildlife species that
inhabit areas that have not burned for more than 80-100 years. Such areas are
limited on the refuge. The Kanuti Refuge Fire Management Plan provides
specific information regarding the use and management of fire on the refuge.
Subsistence Management
ANILCA stipulates that rural Alaska residents who are engaged in
subsistence lifestyles will have priority uses of refuge resources for
traditional purposes. The opportunity for continued subsistence use is one of
the refuge’s purposes and will continue to be a management priority. Rural
Alaska residents will be afforded the opportunity to hunt, fish, and trap in
accordance with State and Federal regulations. Plant material and dead
standing or downed timber can be gathered without a special use permit.
However, gathering live standing timber greater than six inches diameter
at breast height (4 ½ feet above ground level) for house logs, firewood, or
other uses will require a special use permit. Snowmobiles will be allowed
for traditional activities when adequate snow cover is present. Many
aspects of subsistence management and harvest regulations are not within
the jurisdiction of the refuge and are thus not within the scope of this plan.
However, the refuge will continue to work with the State and other Federal
agencies and stakeholders in harvest and resource monitoring programs to
ensure the health and viability of wildlife populations.
Habitat alteration resulting
from fire: These two photos,
taken from the same point on
the Minnkokut Alaska Landbird
Monitoring Survey plot in June
2003 (top) and June 2005, illustrate
habitat alteration from the 2004
Clawanmenka fire.
R. Craig/USFWS Christopher Harwood/USFWS
20
Predator Management
Rising public concerns about the status of moose and caribou populations
prompted requests and proposals for predator control to the State, to the
Federal Subsistence Board (FSB), and to individual refuges. The Service
acknowledges that wolves and bears can significantly affect ungulate
prey population levels and that hunter success can be lowered in areas
with reduced prey populations. We consider predator control a legitimate
management tool provided that it is scientifically justified, used in a
prudent and ecologically sound manner, and is consistent with the laws
and policies governing refuge management. If these conditions occurred,
predator control could be considered by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Public involvement in this process would take place through a separate
planning process and environmental assessment.
Biological Integrity Policy
Whereas most refuges in the United States are concerned with
restoring biological diversity and integrity, refuges in Alaska generally
support intact ecosystems. While the refuge’s establishing purposes
and the System mission serve as the basis for the goals and objectives,
maintenance and restoration of biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health of the refuge are to be included in the refuge’s goals
and objectives. Biological integrity is defined as the “biotic composition,
structure, and functioning at genetic, organism, and community levels
comparable with historic conditions, including the natural biological
processes that shape genomes, organisms, and communities.” Kanuti
Refuge’s first purpose is to conserve fish and wildlife populations and
habitats in their natural diversity. Because the biological diversity on this
refuge is believed to be intact and functioning in a healthy manner, within
the natural range of variability, actions that support the refuge’s first
purpose also uphold the biological integrity policy.
Subsistence hunters usually hunt moose along the rivers in September. The
average number of days it takes a subsistence hunter to harvest a moose has
increased in recent years, perhaps due to lower moose density or effects of
climate change (see page 22).
Bill Raften/USFWS
Henshaw Creek (Saagedleno’, which
means “creek of Saagedle” [big
mountain]), is an important salmon
spawning stream that drains into the
Koyukuk River (Kk’uyetl’ots’ene)
approximately 23 miles above Allakaket
and Alatna.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Adam Kokx/USFWS
Moose (deneege) are an important
subsistence resource. They are also
sought by recreational hunters visiting
the refuge. The estimated moose density
on the refuge has ranged between 0.22-
0.76 moose per square mile between
1989 and 2007. The lowest estimated
population occurred most recently in
2007.
21
Public Use
There are no roads or permanent residences within the refuge. The terrain
is pathless; rivers are challenging to travel. Restrictions on off-road vehicle
travel within the Dalton Highway corridor just east of the Refuge limit access
for visitors. We estimate that fewer than 20 non-local visitors use the refuge
each year. However, the refuge does provide year-round opportunities for
visitors who seek wildlife-dependent recreation in a remote environment. The
refuge will continue to allow, and where possible, facilitate the priority public
uses of hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing and photography, and environmental
education and interpretation (as identified in the Refuge Improvement Act)
as long as they remain compatible with refuge purposes. State regulations
will govern the harvest of fish and game unless those activities are further
regulated by the Federal Subsistence Board.
Access
Access to the refuge from outside the local area is most frequently by
chartered airplane. Fixed wing airplanes can land in many areas of the
refuge, on water in summer or on ice or snow in winter. Airplane landings
will be allowed throughout the refuge and will not be limited. The use of off-road
vehicles (ORVs) other than on established roads and parking areas is
prohibited except on designated routes or areas or with a valid permit under
the Code of Federal Regulations. Currently there are no roads, no parking
areas, and no designated routes or areas on the refuge. Designated routes
and areas could only be allowed in Moderate and Intensive Management
areas. The definition of ORV in the Code of Federal Regulations excludes
snomobiles; it includes airboats, air cushion vehicles, and other motorized
vehicles. ANILCA allows appropriate use of snowmobiles (during adequate
snow cover), motorboats and other means of surface transportation methods
for traditional activities, and for travel to and from villages and homesites,
subject to reasonable regulation. At this time, there is no documented
history of subsistence use of ORVs on the refuge. Should new information
become available that establishes ORVs as a traditional mode of access for
subsistence purposes on the refuge, we will manage the use in accordance
with the Code of Federal Regulations, including establishing refuge-specific
regulations if closures or restrictions are needed to protect refuge resources.
Refuge Infrastructure and Administration
Refuge headquarters is located in the Federal Building in Fairbanks. The
refuge operates an airplane based at the Service hangar at the Fairbanks
International Airport and maintains a storage shed, fuel storage, and airplane
slip at the airport float pond. The refuge operates a sub-headquarters in
Bettles, where a residence, bunkhouse, hangar, workshop, boatyard, fuel
storage shed, floatplane dock and storage shed are maintained. The refuge
shares office and visitor contact space with the National Park Service at a
newly constructed building in Bettles. The Johnson B. Moses administrative
cabin, located within the refuge at Kanuti Lake, supports field work
activities. Another cabin, used as housing for summer employees working at
the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center is located along the Dalton Highway
approximately five miles north of Coldfoot. The Service has no plans for
infrastructure projects on refuge lands.
Wildlife Observation: The Kanuti
Refuge, particularly on or along
waterways like the Kanuti River,
offers challenging, yet rewarding
opportunities for wildlife observation
and photography.
Wild North Photography/USFWS Christopher Harwood/USFWS
Snowmobiles are allowed on the
refuge on waterways and over land
where snow cover is sufficient.
22
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Johnson B. Moses Administrative Cabin at Kanuti Lake (Kk’oonoo Benkk’e)
Climate Change
The climate in Alaska has warmed by about 4 degrees Fahrenheit since the mid-1950s, including a 7-degree
Fahrenheit increase during winter in interior Alaska. Climate models project that the greatest warming will
continue to occur in the arctic region. Data indicate that arctic summers are now warmer than at any other time
in the last 400 years and that the snowfree period is lengthening. A warming climate will have numerous effects
on habitat, hydrology, and species occurrence that could fundamentally change the boreal forest as we know it.
These effects could include melting permafrost, changes in rain and snow patterns, drying wetlands, increased
occurrence of wildland fire, shifts in the distribution and composition of plant communities, lengthening of plant
growing seasons, changes in the ranges and breeding behavior of wildlife species, increased likelihood for invasive
plant establishment, and increased possibility of wildlife disease and insect outbreaks. These changes in habitat and
wildlife due to climate warming will, in turn, affect the arctic and subarctic people who rely on natural resources for
food, fur, and cultural identity.
Changes in wetlands are of particular concern due to their abundance within the refuge, their contribution to the
refuge’s biodiversity, and their importance to numerous fish and wildlife species. Scientists found that a decrease
in the surface area of closed-basin ponds in interior Alaska ranged between four and 31 percent between 1950 and
2002. These changes occurred even though there was no significant trend in the amount of total annual rain and
snow recorded at nearby weather stations. The authors believed that the following factors contributed to the
observed changes in wetlands: increased loss of water due to both evaporation and transpiration by plants caused
by warmer, longer growing seasons; melting permafrost that allows lakes to drain; and increased incidence of
wildland fire that accelerates warming of permafrost.
Research and monitoring efforts can help determine the extent of climate related changes on the refuge.
Since changes occur on a much broader scale than the refuge, the most appropriate role for the refuge in
these investigations is likely to participate in larger, landscape-level efforts to monitor climate change and its
effects on wildlife and habitats. Though there may be little that refuge staff can do to mitigate these changes,
awareness of their long-term effect may result in reprioritization of issues and changes in management strategies.
Communication with resource users regarding evolving information about environmental changes and discussion
of potential management approaches will be increasingly important as conditions change. For example, in areas
of Moderate Management we would be allowed to erect water control structures to enhance waterfowl habitat or
mitigate potential wetland loss due to climate change.
23
Management Categories Table
This table gives an overview, by management category, of activities, public
uses, commercial uses, and facilities according to the new management
direction. It has been adapted to show only activities and categories
that apply to Kanuti Refuge. For the complete table refer to the full-size
document.
The following are definitions of terms used in the table:
Allowed—The activity, use or facility is allowed under existing laws and
regulations.
May be allowed—Activity, use or facility may be allowed subject to site-specific
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) analysis, an
appropriate use finding (when required), a specific refuge compatibility
determination (when required), and compliance with all applicable laws
and regulations of the Service, other Federal agencies and the State of
Alaska.
May be authorized—Activity, use or facility may be allowed; a special use
permit or other authorization is required.
Not allowed—Activity, use or facility is not allowed.
NEPA analysis—All activities, uses and facilities proposed for a refuge
that have the potential to result in significant effects on the environment
require an analysis of potential environmental impacts under the
National Environmental Policy Act. This analysis may be documented as
a categorical exclusion (CE), an environmental assessment (EA), or an
environmental impact statement (EIS), depending on the nature of the
proposed project.
Appropriate Use—All uses over which the Service has jurisdiction must
be determined to be appropriate following direction in the Service Manual.
Hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography and environmental
education and interpretation are considered appropriate by national policy
with no further analysis required.
Compatibility—All activities, uses and facilities allowed on the refuge,
except management actions undertaken by or for the Service, must
be compatible with the purposes of the refuge and the mission of the
Refuge System. The analysis that occurs results in a refuge compatibility
determination.
Temporary—A continuous period of time not to exceed 12 months, except
as specifically provided otherwise.
Area or time restrictions—All activities and uses allowed on a refuge may
be restricted in certain areas or at certain times, at the discretion of the
refuge manager and with the appropriate level of public involvement, by
emergency (short-term) or permanent regulation, if necessary to protect
refuge resources or human health and safety.
Management emergencies—Activities, uses and facilities not allowed on a
refuge or in specific management categories may be allowed if naturally-occurring
or human-caused actions adversely affect refuge resources or
threaten human health and safety. Blueberries (geege), lowbush
cranberries (dinaałakk’aza) and
rosehips (hus) are part of the diet
for people who use the refuge for
subsistence.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS USFWS Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
24
ACTIVITY
MINIMAL MANAGEMENT
MODERATE MANAGEMENT
ECOSYSTEM, HABITAT, AND FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT
Ecosystem and Landscape Management
Collecting Information on and Monitoring Ecosystem Components
Data gathering, monitoring and maintaining a comprehensive database of selected ecosystem components (plants, animals, fish, water, air).
Allowed
Allowed
Research and Management
Access and collection of data necessary for management decisions or to further science by the Service.
Allowed
Allowed
Access and collection of data necessary for management decisions or to further science by ADF&G.
Allowed
Allowed
Access and collection of data necessary for management decisions or to further science by other researchers.
May be authorized
May be authorized
Research and Management Facilities
May be permanent or temporary structures or camps including weirs, counting towers and sonar counters.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management
Describing, Locating, and Mapping Habitats
Development of quantitative, written, and graphic descriptions of fish and wildlife habitat including water, food, and shelter components.
Allowed
Allowed
Habitat Management
Mechanical Treatment Activities such as cutting, crushing or mowing of vegetation; water control structures; fencing; artificial nest structures.
Not allowed; with exceptions (see full document) May be allowed
Chemical Treatment Use of chemicals to remove or control nonnative species.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Manual Treatment Use of hand tools to remove, reduce, or modify hazardous plant fuels, exotic plant species, or to modify habitats (e.g., remove beaver dams).
May be allowed
May be allowed
Aquatic Habitat Modifications
Activities such as stream bank restoration, passage structures, fish barriers, or removal of obstacles which result in physical modification of aquatic habitats to maintain or restore native fish species.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Fire Management—Prescribed Fires
Fire ignited by management actions to meet specific management objectives.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Fire Management—Wildland Fire Use
The planned use of naturally occurring fires to meet management objectives.
May be allowed
May be allowed25
ACTIVITY
MINIMAL MANAGEMENT
MODERATE MANAGEMENT
Fire Management—Fire Suppression
Management actions intended to protect identified resources from a fire, extinguish a fire, or alter a fire’s direction of spread.
Allowed
Allowed
Nonnative and Pest Plant Control
Monitoring, extirpation, control, removal and/or relocation and other management practices for pest and nonnative plant species.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Water Quality and Quantity Management
Monitoring of water quality and quantity to identify baseline data and for management purposes; includes installation of gauging stations.
Allowed
Allowed
Fish and Wildlife Population Management
Reintroduction of Species
The reintroduction of native species to restore natural diversity of fish, wildlife and habitats.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Fish and Wildlife Control
The control, relocation, sterilization, removal or other management of native species including predators to maintain natural diversity of fish, wildlife and habitats; favor other fish or wildlife populations; protect reintroduced, threatened, or endangered species; or to restore depleted native populations.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Nonnative Species Management
The removal or control of nonnative species (including predators).
May be allowed
May be allowed
Pest Management and Disease Prevention and Control
Relocation or removal of organisms that threaten human health or survival of native fish, wildlife or plant species. Management practices directed at controlling pathogens that threaten fish, wildlife and people, such as rabies and parasite control.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Fishery Restoration
Actions taken to restore fish access to spawning and rearing habitat, or actions taken to restore populations to historic levels. Includes harvest management, escapement goals, habitat restoration, stocking, egg incubation boxes, and lake fertilization.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Fishery Restoration Facilities
Fisheries facilities may be permanent or temporary and may include hatcheries, fish ladders, fish passages, fish barriers and associated structures.
May be authorized
May be authorized
Fishery Enhancement
Activities applied to a fish stock to supplement numbers of harvestable fish to a level beyond what could be naturally produced based upon a determination or reasonable estimate of historic levels.
May be allowed
May be allowed26
ACTIVITY
MINIMAL MANAGEMENT
MODERATE MANAGEMENT
Fishery Enhancement Facilities
May be permanent or temporary and may include hatcheries, egg incubation boxes, fish ladders, fish passages, fish barriers and associated structures.
May be authorized
May be authorized
Native Fish Introductions
Movement of native fish species within a drainage on the refuge to areas where they have not historically existed.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Nonnative Species Introductions
Introduction of species not naturally occurring within the refuge.
Not allowed
Not allowed
SUBSISTENCE
Subsistence Activities
Fishing, Hunting, Trapping, and Berry Picking
The taking of fish and wildlife and other natural resources for personal consumption, as provided by law.
Allowed
Allowed
Collection of House Logs and Firewood
Harvesting live standing timber greater than 6 inches diameter at breast height for personal or extended family use.
May be authorized
May be authorized
Collection of House Logs and Firewood
Live trees between 3 and 6 inches diameter at breast height for personal or extended family use.
20 trees or less per year allowed; more than 20 trees per year may be authorized
20 trees or less per year allowed; more than 20 trees per year may be authorized
Collection of Plant Materials
Harvesting trees less than 3 inches diameter at breast height, dead standing or downed timber, grass, bark, and other plant materials used for subsistence purposes.
Allowed
Allowed
Temporary Facilities
Establishment and use of tent platforms, shelters, and other temporary facilities and equipment directly related to the taking of fish and wildlife.
Allowed
Allowed
Subsistence Cabins – See Cabins
Subsistence Access - subject to regulations under provisions of Section 180 of ANILCA
Use of snowmobiles, motorboats, and other means of surface transportation traditionally employed for subsistence purposes.
Allowed
Allowed
ACCESS
Restrictions subject to provisions of Section 1110 of ANILCA as applicable; see also Subsistence Access section above
Foot
Allowed
Allowed
Dogs and Dog Teams
Allowed
Allowed
Other Domestic Animals
Allowed
Allowed27
ACTIVITY
MINIMAL MANAGEMENT
MODERATE MANAGEMENT
Nonmotorized Boats
Includes canoes, kayaks, rafts, etc.
Allowed
Allowed
Motorized
Use of snowmachine, motorboats, airplanes and nonmotorized surface transportation methods for traditional activities and for travel to and from villages and homesites.
Allowed
Allowed
Off-Road Vehicles (All-Terrain Vehicles)
Includes air boats and air cushion vehicles.
Not allowed; with exceptions (see full document)
May be allowed
Helicopters
Includes all rotary-wing aircraft.
May be authorized
May be authorized
PUBLIC USE, RECREATION, and OUTREACH ACTIVITIES
Also see ACCESS and Commercial Recreation sections.
Hunting, Fishing, Wildlife Observation, Wildlife Photography, Interpretation and Environmental Education
Note: All activities listed are priority public uses
Allowed
Allowed
Trapping, Walking, Hiking, Camping at Undeveloped Sites, and Dog Sledding
Allowed
Allowed
General Photography
See also COMMERCIAL USES.
Allowed
Allowed
Outreach Activities
Allowed
Allowed
Public Use and Recreation Facilities - level of development is consistent with management intent of the category
All Weather Roads
And associated developments including bridges.
Not allowed
May be allowed
Unimproved Roads
Note: while unimproved roads are not allowed in Minimal management, roads may exist. In these management categories, roads would not be designated for use or maintained.
Not allowed
May be allowed
Designated Off-Road Vehicle (All-Terrain Vehicle) Trails and Routes
Not allowed
May be allowed
Constructed and Maintained Airstrips
Not allowed
May be allowed
Cleared Landing Strips and Areas
Includes unimproved areas where airplanes land. Minor brush cutting or rock removal by hand is allowed for maintenance.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Constructed Hiking Trails
Includes bridges, boardwalks, trailheads, and related facilities.
May be allowed
May be allowed28
ACTIVITY
MINIMAL MANAGEMENT
MODERATE MANAGEMENT
Designated Hiking Routes
Unimproved and unmaintained trails; may be designated by signs, cairns, and/or on maps.
Allowed
Allowed
Boat Launches and Docks
Designated sites for launching and storing watercraft or tying up a float plane.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Visitor Contact Facilities
A variety of staffed and unstaffed facilities providing information on the refuge and its resources to the public; facilities range from visitor centers to kiosks and signs.
May be authorized
May be authorized
Temporary Facilities
Includes tent frames, caches, and other similar or related facilities; does not include cabins. See also SUBSISTENCE, COMMERCIAL USES, and Administrative Facilities.
May be authorized
May be authorized
Cabins – also other related structures such as outdoor toilets, food caches, storage sheds, and fish drying racks
Public Use Cabin
A cabin administered by the Service and available for use by the public; intended only for short-term public recreational use and occupancy.
Existing cabins allowed to remain; new cabins may be allowed
Existing cabins allowed to remain; new cabins may be allowed
Administrative Cabin
Any cabin primarily used by refuge staff or other authorized personnel for the administration of the refuge.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Subsistence Cabin
Any cabin necessary for health and safety and to provide for the continuation of ongoing subsistence activities; not for recreational use.
Existing cabins allowed to remain; new cabins may be authorized
Existing cabins allowed to remain; new cabins may be authorized
Commercial Cabin
Any cabin which is used in association with a commercial operation including but not limited to commercial fishing activities and recreational guiding services.
Existing cabins allowed to remain; new cabins may be authorized
Existing cabins allowed to remain; new cabins may be authorized
Other Cabins
Cabins associated with authorized uses by other government agencies.
May be authorized
May be authorized
Administrative Facilities
Administrative Field Camps
Temporary facilities used by refuge staff and other authorized personnel to support individual (generally) field projects; may include, but not limited to, tent frames and temporary/portable outhouses, shower facilities, storage/maintenance facilities, and caches.
May be allowed
May be allowed29
ACTIVITY
MINIMAL MANAGEMENT
MODERATE MANAGEMENT
Administrative Field Sites
Permanent facilities used by refuge staff or other authorized personnel for the administration of the refuge. Includes administrative cabins and related structures (see Cabins) and larger multi-facility administrative sites necessary to support on-going field projects, research, and other management activities. Temporary facilities, to meet short-term needs, may supplement the permanent facilities at these sites.
Use of existing sites allowed including replacement of existing facilities as necessary; new sites may be allowed
Use of existing sites allowed including replacement of existing facilities as necessary; new sites may be allowed
Hazardous Materials Storage
Sites including appropriate structures and equipment necessary for the storage and transfer of fuels and other hazardous materials used for administrative purposes; must be in compliance with all Federal and State requirements.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Boat Launches and Docks
Designated sites for launching and storing watercraft or tying up a float plane.
May be allowed
May be allowed
Radio Repeater Sites
Sites used to maintain radio communications equipment; may include helispots for access.
May be allowed
May be allowed
COMMERCIAL USES
Except as noted, a special use permit or other authorization is required for economic use of a refuge.
Commercial Recreation – includes all forms of guiding, including those operated by nonprofit, educational, and other noncommercial groups
Guiding and Outfittinga
May be authorized
May be authorized
Transportingb
May be authorized
May be authorized
Fixed-Wing Air Taxisc
May be authorized
May be authorized
Mineral Exploration - see full plan for information on the Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program
Surface Geological Studies
Includes surface rock collecting and geological mapping activities (includes helicopter or fixed-wing access).
May be authorized
May be authorized
Mineral Development
Oil and Gas Leasing
Leasing, drilling and extraction of oil and gas for commercial purposes. Includes all associated above and below ground facilities.
Not allowed
Not allowed
Sale of Sand, Gravel, and Other Common Variety Minerals
Extraction of sand, gravel, and other saleable minerals for commercial purposes; includes commercial use by Federal, State, and local agencies.
Not allowed
May be authorized
Other Mineral Leasing
Includes the extraction of coal, geothermal resources, potassium, sodium, phosphate, sulfur, or other leaseable minerals for commercial purposes.
Not allowed
Not allowed
a, b, c for definition refer to text section in full document30
ACTIVITY MINIMAL
MANAGEMENT
MODERATE
MANAGEMENT
Other Commercial Activities
Commercial Filming, Videotaping, and Audiotapinga May be authorized May be authorized
Commercial Timber and Firewood Harvestb May be authorized May be authorized
Commercial Gathering of Other Refuge Resourcesc Not allowed May be authorized
Transportation and Utility Systems
Includes transmission lines, pipelines, telephone and electrical power
lines, oil and gas pipelines, communication systems, roads, airstrips,
and other necessary related facilities. Does not include facilities
associated with on-refuge oil and gas development.
May be authorized;
would require a plan
amendment
May be authorized
Navigation Aids and Other Facilities
Includes air and water navigation aids and related facilities,
communication sites and related facilities, facilities for national
defense purposes and related air/water navigation aids, and facilities for
weather, climate, and fisheries research and monitoring; includes both
private and government facilities.
May be authorized May be authorized
Small Hydroelectric Power Development
Hydroelectric generation by low-head or instream structures that do not
change the flow of the river.
Not Allowed May be authorized
a, b, c for definition refer to text section in full document
The upper Kanuti River receives scant boat traffic, it is rare that a boat wake disturbs the calm waters and reflections.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
31
Refuge Goals and Objectives
The refuge vision, purposes, and management alternative provided a framework for developing goals and objectives
for managing the refuge. Many of the objectives important for managing subsistence activities and public use of the
refuge require monitoring or improving our knowledge of the natural resources linked to these activities. Objectives
addressing baseline knowledge of refuge natural resources are mainly listed under Goals 1 and 2. Most of the
objectives for subsistence or public use are listed under Goal 3 or 4, which are focused on improving our knowledge
of the public’s use of the refuge’s resources. The ordering of the goals and objectives below is not intended to imply
prioritization. Some of these objectives may not be addressed during the life of the plan, depending on funding and
personnel available. Each objective is based on an in-depth and explicit rationale. Full-length rationales can be found
in Chapter 2 of the full document.
Objectives:
1. Collaborate with staff of other refuges, agencies, and
research institutes to gain a better understanding of
boreal forest ecosystems.
Rationale: Cooperating on projects is a cost-effective
strategy to address research needs during times
of shrinking budgets. Many ecological questions
are best studied on a regional scale and cannot be
adequately addressed by working within a single land
management unit (e.g., effects of climate change).
2. By 2009, complete the Inventory and Monitoring
step-down plan to integrate and direct inventory and
monitoring of plants, fish and wildlife.
Rationale: An Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) step-down
plan is required by Service policy. The I&M plan
will document the rationale, techniques, and schedule
for routinely conducted inventories and monitoring
efforts and ensures that information is collected in a
biologically and statistically sound manner.
3. Complete an inventory of breeding birds and their
habitats, vascular plants, fire history, and terrestrial
insects within the refuge within 20 years of adoption of
the plan using an integrated plot-based approach.
Rationale: The refuge is mandated by ANILCA to
conserve its fish and wildlife populations and habitats
in their natural diversity, yet data are lacking to
adequately describe this diversity. A basic biological
inventory also was recommended by a panel of
experts during a 2002 review of the Refuge’s biological
program.
4. Obtain a moose population estimate for the refuge
at 1-3 year intervals, including age and sex ratios,
by conducting aerial surveys in cooperation with
neighboring State and Federal land managers.
Rationale: Moose are important to the refuge in both
ecological and human terms. They are an important
subsistence species and most non-local visitors that
currently come to the refuge do so to hunt moose.
Goal 1: Conserve the refuge’s diversity of wildlife, fish, and habitats, while allowing natural processes,
including wildland fire and the natural hydrologic cycle, to shape the environment.
Kanuti Refuge biologist and State of Alaska Fish and
Game biologist are taking measurements from a moose
before collaring it.
T. Cambier
32
Non-native white sweetclover
(Melilotus alba) could pose a threat
to Kanuti Refuge.
5. Obtain baseline information about late winter availability and use of
moose forage species.
Rationale: Moose are an important resource in the refuge, and we
currently have relatively little information on the availability and use of
forage species, primarily willows. Browse information will give us a better
understanding about the potential for the habitat to support growth in the
moose population.
6. Implement the refuge’s Fire Management Plan within the first two
years of its approval.
Rationale: Fire is one of the main drivers of the ecosystems within the
Kanuti Refuge. The plan provides management strategies and objectives
that enable the Service to conserve, protect, or enhance habitats as well as
address human health and safety issues.
7. Document fire history patterns on the refuge by collecting data on tree
age annually, in association with inventory plots (see Objective 1) and by
participating in research on Alaskan fire regimes during the life of this
plan.
Rationale: Our current knowledge of fire history patterns is insufficient to
manage for natural fire regimes or adapt to potential habitat or population
changes caused by climate change. Documentation of the fire history
patterns on the refuge received high priority during a 2002 review of the
refuge’s biological program.
8. Conduct surveys to determine if non-native, invasive plant species are
becoming established on the refuge.
Rationale: Non-native invasive plants can out-compete native plants
and often have little or no value for wildlife. Currently, non-native white
sweetclover is a common plant along the Dalton Highway, and seeds of
this plant could disperse along rivers crossed by the highway.
9. Determine the seasonal distribution (spawning and wintering areas) and
migratory patterns of select species of whitefish (broad whitefish, humpback
whitefish, and least cisco) within five years of adoption of this plan and
assess the potential for similar studies of other resident fish such as pike and
grayling.
Rationale: The Kanuti Fisheries Management Plan (1993) documents
issues and concerns regarding fisheries resources on the refuge, including
an objective “to determine resident fish abundance and distribution in three
major drainages of the Kanuti Refuge.”
10. Map spawning areas of anadromous fish and assess escapement of salmon
within 10 years of adoption of this plan.
Rationale: This objective addresses data needs identified in the Kanuti
Fisheries Management Plan (1993). Information gathered so far does not
address spawning areas on the Koyukuk River above Henshaw Creek
or in tributaries of the Kanuti River. If airboat or jetboat use increases
significantly cooperative studies may be undertaken to determine if these
uses affect fish spawning.
11. Monitor snow depth and density at six snow markers on a monthly basis
(December - May).
Rationale: The amount and duration of snowfall on the refuge can affect a
variety of factors, including distribution and overwinter survival of wildlife,
timing of spring bird migration, spring flooding and nutrient input to lakes,
and the timing and probability of fire the following spring.
Research Institute for Fodder Crops, Ltd.Troubsko
Mike Spindler/USFWS
Measuring snow depth and density
on the refuge.
33
12. Monitor the beaver population on the refuge by conducting fall aerial
surveys of beaver food caches at 5-10 year intervals.
Rationale: Beaver are an important resource for large predators and
people, and their water manipulation activities influence habitats on the
refuge. A technique for estimating the number of caches was tested with
good results in 2002 and 2003, and this technique will become part of the
refuge’s regular monitoring activities.
13. Estimate the number of wolves on the refuge in late winter at 3-5 year
intervals.
Rationale: Monitoring wolf numbers will help the refuge address
management concerns by documenting the normal fluctuations in
population size and distribution and assessing the potential effect of
wolves on prey populations.
14. Document winter abundance and distribution of caribou through
monthly reconnaissance flights.
Rationale: Caribou are periodic winter migrants onto the refuge and can
provide hunting opportunity for humans and prey for wolves.
15. Continue long-term studies of fire effects on small mammals and
vegetation to document changes through different stages of forest
succession during the life of the plan or until results indicate that the
population and habitat has stabilized.
Rationale: Both projects were started following large wildland fires in
the early 1990s and contribute to the understanding of fire effects on
vegetation and wildlife populations in interior Alaska.
16. Investigate and assess the feasibility of conducting surveys to index bear
abundance in select refuge locations.
Rationale: Little is known about the number of black and grizzly bears on
the refuge. Refuge staff will assess existing and emerging techniques for
monitoring bears to determine if there is a cost-effective, repeatable method
that would suit its needs.
17. Assess the feasibility of monitoring the distribution and abundance of
snowshoe hares and other furbearers using aerial surveys of tracks.
Rationale: Little is known about snowshoe hares and other furbearers on
the refuge. New techniques, such as aerial videography of tracks in winter,
should be assessed as tools to provide baseline data about snowshoe hares
and furbearers and to monitor them over time.
18. Contribute to continental, statewide, and bioregional monitoring efforts
to establish trends in migratory landbird populations through annual
participation in scientifically defensible, peer-recognized programs such
as the continental Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) and Alaska Landbird
Monitoring Survey (ALMS). Participation in these programs would include
not only implementation, but assistance in the refinement and testing of
procedures.
Rationale: Conservation of migratory birds in their natural diversity is part
of the purposes of Kanuti Refuge. Migratory birds are also a Trust species of
the Service.
Aerial view of moose: Biologists
conduct moose counts from low
flying aircraft in late October to mid-
November, as soon as there is a base
of 10” of snow on the ground. The
estimated moose population on the
refuge has ranged from 588 to 2010,
1989–2007.
Glenn Stout/ADF&G
Randy Brown/USFWS
Results from studies using radio
transmitters like this one on a broad
whitefish (taaseze) showed that some
whitefish within Kanuti Refuge
migrate seasonally.
USFWS
Beaver lodge on Kanuti Refuge
34
19. Continue to assist in annual monitoring of the Alaska mid-continent
Greater White-fronted Goose population.
Rationale: Greater White-fronted Geese are a Trust species, and are
specifically mentioned in the refuge’s purposes. Biologists have been
concerned about a possible decline in numbers of these geese.
20. Assist USFWS-Migratory Bird Management in statewide programs,
including but not limited to swan censuses.
Rationale: Migratory waterfowl, including swans, are Trust species and
are specifically mentioned for conservation in the refuge’s purposes.
21. Determine current species composition of swans on the refuge.
Rationale: Both Trumpeter and Tundra Swans occur on the refuge.
An intensive survey of nesting swans will determine if the species
representation occurs in the same proportion as it did 20 years ago.
22. Replicate (and where necessary, modify) the 1997 expanded aerial
waterfowl breeding pair survey, in cooperation with USFWS-Migratory
Bird Management, within the life of this plan. The survey should be
conducted regularly (e.g., every five years) thereafter. The survey(s)
should ensure adequate sampling for dabblers and divers/sea ducks.
Rationale: Waterfowl are a Trust species and specifically mentioned in the
refuge’s purposes. The aerial line transect surveys of breeding waterfowl,
conducted annually on the refuge since 1957 as part of the North American
Waterfowl Breeding Pair Survey, are likely not representative of the
refuge, nor do they take into consideration the potential necessity for
different survey timing for dabbling ducks and diving/sea ducks.
23. For those species of migratory birds that regularly breed on the refuge
and are demonstrating long-term population declines, continue collaboration
towards conservation, including monitoring, research, and outreach.
Rationale: Examples of such species include Horned Grebe, Lesser
Yellowlegs, Solitary Sandpiper, Olive-sided Flycatcher, Blackpoll Warbler,
and Rusty Blackbird. Refuge support could include providing study sites for
projects, testing methods, and participating in working groups.
24. Collaborate with the Boreal Program for Regional and International
Shorebird Monitoring (Boreal PRISM) to help design and implement
appropriate inventory and monitoring techniques for breeding and migrant
shorebirds.
Rationale: Little is known about temporary habitats for inland migrants
and/or breeders. Also, populations of some boreal forest-breeding shorebird
species are declining on a continental level. Investigation of habitats used
and development of monitoring techniques will contribute to a more complete
inventory of shorebirds and their habitats within the refuge.
25. Design and implement a long-term waterfowl and waterbird production
survey on the refuge.
Rationale: A long-term study could provide information on relative
abundance, productivity, survival, mortality, and habitats of waterfowl and
other waterbirds and may be indicative of changes in the ecosystem, caused
for example, by climate change.
Northern Pintail (k’edzonule)
USFWS Wild North Photography/USFWS
White-fronted geese (k’edot’aagge’)
Adam Kokx/USFWS
Northern Shoveler nest
Luke Smithwick/USFWS
Hudsonian Godwit
35
Goal 2: Ensure the natural function and condition of water
resources necessary to conserve fish and wildlife populations
and habitats in their natural diversity.
Objectives:
26. Develop a water resource inventory and assessment study plan in
conjunction with the Service’s Water Resources Branch within the life of
this plan.
Rationale: This will aid in identifying and coordinating water research
and data collection efforts on the refuge and will provide baseline water
quality and quantity information. It will help our understanding of the
significance of the hydrologic cycle in the refuge ecosystem.
27. At the conclusion of the initial assessment, evaluate the need to
continue monitoring streamflow and/or water quality conditions to support
research or management objectives.
Rationale: Sufficient water quality and quantity is critical to support fish,
wildlife, and plants on the refuge. Few data are currently available about
water resources.
28. Formulate a strategy to inventory wetland and lake resources within
the refuge, including aquatic plants, fish, wetland-dependent wildlife,
aquatic invertebrates, and physical and chemical properties of lakes and
wetlands.
Rationale: Lakes and wetlands within refuge boundaries need to be
described, including the plants and wildlife dependent on them, and a
baseline for comparison for future conditions needs to be established.
29. Formulate a strategy to inventory the river and stream resources
within the refuge boundaries, including aquatic plants, river-dependent
fish and wildlife, aquatic invertebrates, riparian and floodplain habitat, and
physical and chemical properties of rivers and streams.
Rationale: Waters flowing through the refuge need to be described,
including the natural hydrologic processes that create the dynamic
habitats necessary to support the plants, wildlife and fisheries on the
refuge.
30. Assess the feasibility of developing a hydrologic model for the refuge.
Rationale: A hydrologic model would allow the refuge to track and predict
changes in water resources, such as may be caused by climate change, and
evaluate the effect of these changes on fish, wildlife, plants and people.
Fall colors around wetlands on
Kanuti Refuge
The confluence (Hudokkakk’et) of the Kanuti River and the Koyukuk River
is about 16 miles below Allakaket and Alatna and just outside of the refuge.
Bill Raften/USFWS
Bill Raften/USFWS
36
Goal 3: Provide opportunities for local residents to pursue their
subsistence lifestyle.
Objectives:
31. As a continuing commitment, conduct annual informational meetings
in each village associated with the refuge and regularly attend other
subsistence-related meetings, providing information regarding the status of
subsistence resources and their use, and commenting on proposals related to
subsistence management within the refuge to maintain a respectful dialogue
with refuge resource stakeholders and subsistence users.
Rationale: Face-to-face meetings in local communities are the most effective
forum for reviewing Federal subsistence harvest regulations and for
discussing issues of local concern to subsistence users.
32. Continue to work closely with stakeholders to address issues and concerns
through the State and Federal regulatory processes as provided in ANILCA
to conserve fish and wildlife. Stakeholders include Tribal Councils, the
Koyukuk River State Fish and Game Advisory Committee, the Western
Interior Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, other local/regional
working groups, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the Office of
Subsistence Management.
Rationale: The refuge is mandated by ANILCA to provide the opportunity
for continued subsistence uses by local residents when consistent with other
refuge purposes. It is essential that affected parties work cooperatively
towards common subsistence goals.
33. Develop a partnership with Tribal Councils, Alaska Department of Fish
and Game Subsistence Division, and the Office of Subsistence Management
to seek funding to review historical subsistence use data (hunting, trapping,
and fishing), identify data gaps, and develop a research protocol that will
incorporate western science and traditional ecological knowledge to document
changing resource and use patterns.
Rationale: An effective strategy for providing continued subsistence
opportunities and managing for healthy populations of fish, wildlife and
plants should take into account all available historical and current knowledge
of subsistence activities, relying on scientific data as well as traditional
ecological knowledge gained through partnerships with local communities,
Tribal representatives, and other organizations.
34. Work with stakeholders to develop and implement a subsistence harvest
monitoring plan to conserve migratory bird populations for continued
subsistence use. Stakeholders include Tribal Councils, Alaska Department of
Fish and Game Subsistence Division, the Office of Subsistence Management,
Alaska Migratory Bird Co-management Council, and the Interior Region
Management Body (Tanana Chiefs Conference).
Rationale: ANILCA and a recent amendment to the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act direct us to conserve migratory birds for continued subsistence use and
document traditional migratory bird harvest levels. A migratory bird harvest
monitoring plan and implementation protocol based on an accurate estimate
of harvest are needed to ensure long-term conservation of Trust species and
continued opportunity for subsistence use.
Blueberry abundance varies from
year to year.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Fishcamp after season: Salmon
fishing occurs from July through
September, then the emphasis shifts
toward whitefish until ice starts
flowing in October.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Spring harvest of waterfowl is
considered a customary and
traditional part of subsistence and
has been legalized with a recent
amendment to the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act.
Luke Smithwick/USFWS
37
Goal 4: Provide opportunities for quality public use and enjoyment
of refuge resources in ways that minimize conflicts among
user groups through compatible wildlife-dependent recreation
activities, including hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and
photography.
Objectives:
35. Review methods of monitoring levels and types of public use, and
implement new methodology if determined appropriate.
Rationale: Accurate public use data is a critical component in evaluating
existing levels of service to the public, and in ensuring recreational uses
remain compatible with the purposes of the refuge.
36. Continue to provide a range of opportunities for multi-day recreational
trips within the refuge which allow the public to experience and explore
the dynamic landscape and wildlife of the refuge in solitude, incorporating
various methods of access.
Rationale: Many visitors and local residents who go to the refuge are
seeking a remote and wild experience. The mode of access utilized
(floatplane, snowmobile, canoe, etc.) will shape the desired experience.
37. Working with community and State and Federal authorities, develop a
comprehensive law enforcement program with an emphasis on educating
visitors to prevent violations.
Rationale: To enhance visitor experiences and help protect refuge
resources, the refuge needs a good strategy for improving visitor safety
and compliance with existing rules and regulations. Violations do occur
but are not always intentional and often are due to misunderstandings,
misinformation, or lack of knowledge.
38. Assess and evaluate levels and patterns of snowmobile use on the
refuge and off-road vehicle (ORV) use on adjacent and private lands within
refuge boundaries.
Rationale: Snowmobile and ORV use on and near the refuge must be
monitored carefully to ensure that activities minimize wildlife disturbance
and prevent impacts to habitat.
39. Continue working with Evansville Incorporated, the National Park
Service, Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, and
the City of Bettles to design and build an interpretive nature trail near
Bettles on land adjacent to the northern boundary of the refuge.
Rationale: This interpretive trail would present a unique
opportunity for visitors and local residents of Bettles to view
wildlife living in and utilizing habitats typical of the refuge.
Commercial air taxi operators and transporters
provide the most common means of access for
recreational visitors.
Most local residents use outboard
motorboats for river travel. Much of
the Koyukuk River (Kk’uyetl’ots’ene)
is easy to navigate, but even wide, long
stretches can be challenging during
low water levels because of submerged
sandbars.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
USFWS Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Most non-local visitors travel rivers
within the refuge by inflatable raft,
canoe, or small motorized boat.
Camping along one of the many rivers
within the refuge is a unique and
memorable experience.
38
Goal 5: Provide outreach, environmental education, and
interpretive programs to develop/increase a sense of stewardship
for wildlife, cultural resources, and the environment, and to
enhance visitor experiences on the refuge.
Objectives:
40. Update the 1992 Environmental Education and Interpretative Plan,
reviewing and revising periodically as necessary.
Rationale: A well planned strategy for conducting environmental
education and interpretive programs will help provide for public
understanding of refuge resources, issues, and public uses.
41. Continue to provide the public with timely and accurate information
about the refuge through a wide variety of communication tools;
re-evaluate the tools utilized and update and correct information at least
twice annually.
Rationale: Currently the refuge utilizes a variety of communication
tools (e.g., an internet website, newsletter, brochures, etc.). These tools
can provide the public with accurate information but only if periodically
evaluated and updated.
42. In partnership with the Bureau of Land Management and the National
Park Service, continue providing interpretive and educational experiences
to visitors at the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center in Coldfoot by
contributing staff and operational support.
Rationale: The Arctic Interagency Visitor Center is located in the Dalton
Highway Corridor and in recent years, has hosted more than 8,000 visitors
annually. It presents an invaluable opportunity to inform the public about
all aspects of the Kanuti Refuge.
43. In Fairbanks, Bettles, Evansville, Allakaket, Alatna, and Coldfoot,
participate when possible in community events, festivals, and programs that
will facilitate education and interpretation of Service and refuge goals.
Rationale: Participation in community-based events provides opportunities
to inform the public, and to build community support for the refuge.
44. Expand opportunities for individuals, organized groups, and families to
learn about the refuge through activities including environmental education
programs, nature walks, and interpretive programs.
Rationale: Such opportunities can prepare visitors to have safe and enjoyable
experiences on the refuge, as well as educate a variety of audiences about
conservation topics or refuge issues.
45. As opportunities arise, provide classroom visits and educational materials
as requested by educators in the Yukon-Koyukuk School District.
Rationale: Increased cooperation between the refuge and the Yukon-
Koyukuk School District will improve environmental awareness among youth
and the general public.
46. Work closely with the National Park Service to operate and maintain the
bunkhouse and other facilities built in Bettles in 2008 to replace the facility
that burned in January 2004.
Rationale: Approximately 400 people visit the shared visitor facility in
Bettles annually, with another 3,000 people contacting the station each year
seeking information about the park and refuge. This facility is the closest
many people will ever come to the refuge. Quality facilites in Bettles will
allow the Service to enhance land stewardship and better serve the public by
providing a place to learn about resources within and around the refuge.
The Kanuti Refuge provides U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service representation at
the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center
in Coldfoot.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Barry Whitehill /USFWS
Refuge staff assisted young hunters
at the FWS-sponsored Steel Shot
Clinic in Allakaket in 2005.
The visitor facility in Bettles shared
with the National Park Service is as
close as many people will ever come to
the refuge.
The bunkhouse in Bettles was built
in cooperation with the National
Park Service in 2008.
Mike Spindler /USFWS
Mike Spindler /USFWS
39
Goal 6: Foster an appreciation for the cultural resources of the
refuge through conservation and interpretation.
Objectives:
47. Update, compile, and organize the refuge cultural resource atlas and
database to include all known historical and archaeological sites, place
names, and paleontological locality information. Identify priority areas
to inventory for archaeological and other cultural sites and conduct
surveys as time and personnel allow. Perform surveys at a level sufficient
to evaluate the eligibility of identified sites to the National Register of
Historic Places.
Rationale: Very little is known about the cultural resources of the Kanuti
Refuge. Compiling all known information will make it possible to evaluate
information needs and set priorities for surveys and research.
48. Seek out and develop partnerships with Native corporations,
universities, other government agencies, etc., to cooperatively inventory,
manage, and protect cultural and historical resources.
Rationale: Cooperative projects with museums, universities, Tribal
entities, Native corporations, and other institutions allow parties to
pool scarce resources and increase the amount and the quality of work
completed.
49. Update the refuge’s Cultural Resources Guide by 2011 (15 years after
it was first completed).
Rationale: Updating this step-down plan will allow refuge staff to better
understand where they should concentrate inventory and survey efforts.
50. In cooperation with the communities of Allakaket, Alatna, Bettles,
and Evansville, develop a plan or products using existing traditional place
names information for the refuge.
Rationale: Place names contain an enormous amount of information on
traditional uses, culturally significant places, historical camps and
settlements, and other culturally important information. Existing
information is an untapped archive that could mutually benefit the four
communities of Allakaket, Alatna, Bettles, and Evansville as well as the
refuge, recognizing the significant role of local people in the natural and
cultural heritage of the refuge.
This artifact, a sidescraper (possibly
‘daa’oghe), was found on the refuge in
2006. Sidescrapers were used to clean
hides and carve wood and bone. This
type of tool was used during several
eras so it is not possible to determine
its precise age. This example is small
(~1½”) and we assume that it may
have been used for fine skin work by
the ancestors of the Koyukon people
roughly 1,000 years ago.
Adam Kokx/USFWS
Pump and pulleys at the Union City Townsite - remnants of
turn-of-the-century mining activities on the refuge.
USFWS
40
In fiscal year (FY) 2008, the refuge had a staff of five full-time permanent and three part-time and/or seasonal employees assigned solely to Kanuti. Permanent employees included a refuge manager/pilot, a deputy refuge manager, a lead wildlife biologist, and an avian wildlife biologist. Part-time and seasonal employees included a park ranger (stationed at the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center), one biological technician, and one maintenance worker. For efficiency, considerable sharing of staff occurs among the three refuges with offices co-located in Fairbanks (Kanuti, Arctic, and Yukon Flats). One full-time permanent and one part-time administrative staffers were assigned to the Kanuti Refuge but shared among Kanuti, Arctic, and Yukon Flats Refuges. In addition, a fire management officer (FMO), and assistant fire management officer and a fire management specialist were assigned to the Kanuti Refuge to serve all three Fairbanks-based refuges. A subsistence coordinator, two law enforcement officers, two information technology specialists, and a maintenance worker/pilot are supervised by Yukon Flats and Arctic Refuges but are shared by the three Fairbanks-based refuges. Additional law enforcement officers at Arctic and Yukon Flats Refuges assist Kanuti Refuge when needed. Kanuti Refuge’s base budget in FY2008 was $928,000. This will be reduced by $94,000 in 2009 (and beyond) to reflect administrative restructuring. To maintain the current staffing situation in the short term (less than three years), this present level of funding, adjusted for inflation, would be required. Long-term budget and staffing goals (3–15 years) provide for implementation of projects identified in the CCP Goals and Objectives, and Refuge Operational Needs System (RONS) to accommodate anticipated increases in subsistence and recreational demands.
Currently identified essential staffing, mission-critical projects, and an increase in recurring base funds to implement projects include: (values are in 2008 dollars)
An increase of $105,000 in base funds to provide for and support an airplane pilot position within the next three • years; this function will be combined with a biologist, manager or maintenance worker; it may be based in Bettles or in Fairbanks;
An increase of $74,000 in recurring base funds to provide for and support a maintenance worker in Bettles or • Evansville;
An increase of $48,000 to provide for and support an office automation clerk that would be shared among the • three Fairbanks-based refuges;
An increase of $59,000 to provide for and support an interpretive park ranger or outreach specialist in Bettles or • in Fairbanks;
An increase of $72,000 to provide for and support a general biologist for aquatic environments to address • important objectives in this plan; and
An increase of $27,000 to provide for and support a refuge information technician in Allakaket or Alatna. This • position may be contracted for directly with the local Tribe.
One-time construction projects include approximately $325,000 for energy efficiency and renewable energy • upgrades to three buildings in Bettles. An additional $200,000 will be requested to add a garage and improve energy efficiency at the maintenance shop in Bettles.
Seasonal employees and volunteers play an important role in refuge operations. The number of seasonal employees and volunteers could vary considerably from year to year depending upon projects and budgets. In fiscal year 2008 Kanuti enjoyed the benefits of 26 volunteers who contributed more than 2,900 hours of service. The refuge was fortunate in 2008 and it is not likely that this level of volunteer assistance will be sustainable in the long-term. It is more likely that some of these duties will have to be performed by paid employees or that the projects will be put on hold.
Funding and Personnel Requirements41
Item
Short-Term
Implementation
(<3 years)
Long-Term
Implementation
(3–15 years)
Annual Recurring Base Budget + Fire Preparedness Fundinga $1,336,606 $2,391,606
Permanent Full Time (PFT) Employees assigned to Kanuti 9.6 15.1
Permanent Part-Time (PPT) assigned to Kanuti 1 2
Permanent Full Time Kanuti NWR employees not shared with
other Fairbanks-based refuges:
Refuge Manager/Pilot
Deputy Refuge Manager
Lead Wildlife Biologist
Wildlife Biologist (Avian)
Administrative Support Assistant
Long-term positions to be added (RONS proposals):
Airplane Pilot/Park Ranger or Airplane Pilot/Biologist - PFT- Bettles or
Fairbanks
Maintenance Worker - PFT - Bettles
Interpretive Park Ranger or Outreach Specialist - PFT - Bettles
Biologist (aquatics or fisheries) - PFT - Fairbanks
Refuge Information Technician - PPT- Allakaket or Alatnab
5 9.5
Permanent Kanuti NWR employees shared with both Yukon
Flats and Arctic NWRs:
Administrative Officer
Fire Management Officer
Assistant Fire Management Officer - PFT - Fairbanks
Fire Management Specialist - PFT - Fairbanks
Interpretive Park Ranger (Coldfoot - PPT - 24 hr./week)
Long-term positions to be added (RONS proposals):
Office Automation Clerk - PFT - Fairbanks
4.6 5.6
Permanent Yukon Flats NWR employees shared with both Kanuti
and Arctic NWRs:
Subsistence Coordinator
Law Enforcement Officer
2 2
Permanent Arctic NWR employees shared with both Kanuti and
Yukon Flats NWRs:
Information Technology Specialists (2)
Maintenance Worker/Pilot
Law Enforcement Officer
4 4
Seasonal Employees assigned to Kanuti NWRc 2 4
Seasonal Volunteers assigned to Kanuti NWRc 2 4
a Based on FY 2008 base budget minus $94,000 to reflect restructuring of the administrative team plus $216,606 to reflect
restructuring of the fire management program
b RIT function may be contracted with the Tribe rather than filled as a Service employee.
c Numbers of seasonal employees and volunteers will probably increase but will vary from year to year.
42
Christopher Harwood /USFWS
Implementation and Monitoring
Step-down Plans
Implementation of the Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan will be accomplished,
in part, through various step-down plans, each with its own program focus. Step-down plans deal with specific
management strategies and implementation schedules and provide details necessary to implement management
strategies identified in the CCP. Step-down plans for Kanuti Refuge include the following:
Fisheries Management Plan
The 1993 Kanuti Fisheries Management Plan (FMP) provides a
description of habitats and fish species known or expected to occur within
the refuge. It identifies the four purposes of the refuge as goals, provides
objectives for each goal, and lists tasks designed to meet the objectives.
Many of the 11 objectives listed in the 1993 FMP have not or only partially
been addressed. Progress has been made in the following areas:
• monitoring escapement of salmon stocks with the operation of
Henshaw Creek weir;
• determining resident fish abundance and distribution in three major
drainages using radio telemetry in whitefish; and
• monitoring and evaluating subsistence harvest of fish species within
the refuge.
The FMP is to be updated every five years.
Inventory and Monitoring Plan
An Inventory and Monitoring plan (I&M plan) consist of two main
components:
• a discussion of a refuge’s biological priorities and objectives and how
these were determined; and
• protocols for meeting these priorities and objectives.
The refuge does not have an I&M plan, but it is scheduled to complete one
by 2009. Biological priorities were discussed during a 2002 review of the
refuge’s biological program which will form the basis for the discussion
portion of the I&M plan.
Cultural Resource Guide
The 1996 Cultural Resource Guide assists refuge staff in meeting legal
requirements to protect and manage the cultural resources of the refuge. It
describes the current state of knowledge of the prehistory and history of the
region and outlines roles and responsibilities. It includes a list of projects that
would fill in gaps in knowledge or complete existing work. This guide is to be
updated in 2012.
Environmental Education and Interpretative Plan
The 1992 Environmental Eduction and Interpretative (EE&I) Plan gives
guidance to refuge staff regarding educational and outreach programs.
It describes efforts within the communities near the refuge, specifically
within schools. This plan will be rewritten after the completion of this
Comprehensive Conservation Plan.
Kanuti Refuge cooperates with the
Office of Subsistence Management,
Fisheries Resources, and Tanana
Chiefs Conference to support a
salmon escapement monitoring
project at the Henshaw Creek fish
weir.
Mike Spindler /USFWS
Spruce Grouse
43
Fire Management Plan
The Fire Management Plan describes how the refuge would respond in a
wildland fire situation. Refuge fire management needs have been classified
with regard to land and resource management objectives, and resource and
structure protection needs. This plan was completed in 2007.
Land Protection Plan
The 2002 Kanuti Refuge Land Protection Plan focuses on private lands within
the refuge boundaries with the goal of identifying and conserving high-quality
habitat on those lands. Land conservation measures will be pursued
only with landowners who are willing to work with the Service. The refuge
and landowners are not obligated to undertake any of the measures identified.
Station Safety Plan, Fire Emergency Evacuation Plan, and Station Security Plan
These plans focus on providing a safe and healthful environment for
employees and visitors. They aim to minimize the potential for injury to
employees and the public and to prevent property damage. All plans are
reviewed annually.
Water Resources Inventory and Assessment: Plan of Study
This plan guides a six-year inventory and assessment of the water resources
on the refuge. Results of the study will be used to quantify in-stream flow
water rights for the maintenance and protection of fish and wildlife habitat.
The plan will be completed in 2009. Implementation will be determined by
budget and personnel availability.
Environmental Management Plan
This plan was updated in 2005 and then again in 2008. It identifies and ranks
field station activities, products, and services that affect the environment, and
it sets goals and measurable targets to improve environmental performance
relative to field station operations and impacts.
Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan
This 2000 plan outlines the procedures, methods, and equipment used at the
refuge to comply with Environmental Protection Agency oil spill prevention,
control, and countermeasure standards. This plan is reviewed every three
years by the Regional Spill Coordinator.
Horsetail is widespread in the boreal
forest.
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Wild North Photography/USFWS
Windswept snow surface
Wild North Photography/USFWS
Red fox hunting for voles under
the snow.
44
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Luke Smithwick/USFWS
Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges
Partnership Opportunities
The CCP implementation process also includes identifying partnership opportunities that may assist in
accomplishing refuge objectives. Partnerships with other organizations are among the ways the Service fulfills its
mission: “Working with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the
continuing benefit of the American people.”
The refuge exists within a dynamic ecosystem. Many of the resources within the refuge are of regional, State,
national, and international importance. We recognize that the public, organizations and other governmental agencies
have interests in the refuge. Implementation of many refuge programs requires involvement from these interested
parties. Among others, refuge staff has coordinated activities with the following:
• State of Alaska
• Other Federal Agencies (e.g., National Park Service, Bureau of Land
Management)
• Western Interior Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council
• Migratory Bird Co-management Council
• Alatna, Allakaket, and Evansville village councils
• K’oyitl’ots’ina and Evansville village corporations
• Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc. (Regional Native non-profit
organization)
• Doyon, Inc. (Regional Native Corporation)
• City of Bettles
• City of Allakaket
• Bettles Chamber of Commerce
• Universities and museums
• Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce
• Nongovernmental organizations (e.g., Friends of Alaska National
Wildlife Refuges, Alaska Natural History Association, Ducks
Unlimited, Alaska Bird Observatory, Friends of Creamer’s Field)
Aerial surveys of wolves and their
tracks to estimate wolf abundance
on the refuge are done in cooperation
with the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G).
The Arctic Interagency Visitor Center
in Coldfoot, which opened in 2003,
is operated by the Bureau of Land
Management in cooperation with the
National Park Service and the Fish
and Wildlife Service.
Members of Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges and Americorps,
in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park
Service, and the Fish and Wildlife Service have helped fight invasive weeds
on the Dalton Highway to reduce risks to the refuge.
45
Monitoring and Evaluation
Monitoring helps refuge staff
track the progress of plan
implementation. Results of
monitoring activities show how
objectives are being achieved
and measure progress towards
accomplishing goals. Many of the
objectives in refuge step-down
plans involve collection of baseline
data that may lead to additional
monitoring efforts. The step-down
plans will provide detailed methods
and frequencies for inventory and
monitoring activities.
Plan Amendment and Revision
Periodic review and revision of this comprehensive conservation plan will
be necessary. As knowledge of refuge resources, users, and uses improves,
changes in management may be identified. Fish and wildlife populations, user
groups, adjacent land uses, and other management considerations change
with time, often in unforeseen ways. Challenges also may be encountered in
trying to implement the plan.
Revisions are a necessary part of the adaptive management approach used by
the Service. This means that objectives and strategies to reach goals can be
adjusted. Most of the resulting changes will fine-tune the plan. These changes
will not require modification of this document because minor changes will be
addressed in the more detailed refuge step-down and annual work plans. Only
if a major change is required in management of the refuge will it be necessary
to revise this plan with a new environmental assessment.
To enable refuge users, adjacent landowners, local, State, and Federal
agencies, and other interested parties to express their views on how the
refuge is being managed, the refuge will periodically hold meetings or use
other techniques such as comment cards and surveys to solicit comments for
evaluation purposes. By encouraging continuing public input, the refuge will
be better able to serve the public, anticipate potential problems, and take
immediate action to resolve existing problems.
Every three to five years, refuge staff will review public comments, local and
State government recommendations, staff recommendations, research
studies, and other sources to determine if revisions to the plan are necessary.
If major changes are proposed, public meetings may be held, and a new
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement may be
necessary. Full review and updating of the conservation plan will occur every
15 years.
Wild North Photography/USFWS
Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Luke Smithwick/USFWS
Muskrat (bekenaale) on Kanuti
Refuge
Refuge scenery
The wood frog (noghuye) has the
ability to freeze as much as 35 to 45
percent of its body during the cold
winter months.
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Division of Conservation Planning and Policy
1011 E. Tudor Rd, MS 231
Anchorage, AK 99503
http://www.fws.gov
http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/planning/index.htm
http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/planning/kanpol.htm
http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/kanuti/index.htm
September 2008