Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement Wilderness Review Wild and Scenic River Review Volume 1

              U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Arctic
National
Wildlife
Refuge
Draft Revised
Comprehensive
Conservation Plan
Draft Environmental
Impact Statement
Wilderness
Review
Wild and Scenic
River Review
Volume 1
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission
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.
National Wildlife Refuge System Mission
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.
This Comprehensive Conservation Plan describes programs that may
exceed future budget allocations and therefore does not constitute
specific commitments for future staff increases, project details, or
funding.
This page intentionally left blank.
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
101 12th Avenue, Room 236
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701-6237
(907) 456-0250
Dear Reader:
This is the draft revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan (Plan, Revised Plan) and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It includes a Wilderness Review (Appendix H) and a Wild and Scenic River Review
(Appendix I). The final version of this Plan will guide management of the Refuge for the next 15 years. The Plan outlines goals and
objectives, Refuge management guidelines, and six management alternatives for addressing management issues raised by the public
and the agency. The Plan also describes our evaluation of the environmental impacts associated with implementing each alternative.
Additionally, the Refuge manager’s preliminary reviews of the compatibility of Refuge uses with Refuge purposes are presented in
Appendix G—Compatibility Determinations.
This Plan has been sent to you because public involvement in the planning process is essential for developing an effective
plan. Please review and provide comment on the Plan’s content no later than 90 days after the Plan was released (see our web
site (http://arctic.fws.gov/ccp.htm) for the comments due date). Comments should be specific and should address the merits
of distinct aspects of the document such as the goals, objectives, management guidelines, or alternatives, or the adequacy of
the environmental analysis. We will consider your comments as we prepare the Final Plan. Objections that could have been
raised at this draft stage may be waived if they are not raised until after completion of the Final Plan.
All public comments received, including respondent names and addresses, will be included in the planning record, which will
be available for public review. If you, as an individual, want us to withhold your name or contact information, please state
this prominently at the beginning of your comments. We will honor your request to the extent allowed by law. We are unable
to withhold the names or contact information for representatives or officials of organizations or businesses.
Public meetings will be held in the communities of Arctic Village, Fort Yukon, Kaktovik, Venetie, Fairbanks, and Anchorage
during the public review period. Meeting dates, times, and locations will be announced at http://arctic.fws.gov/ccp.htm
once they are confirmed.
You may view the draft revised Plan, EIS, Wilderness Review, Wild and Scenic River Review, and a summary of these
reports, online at http://arctic.fws.gov/ccp.htm. You may also request a hard copy of the summary or a compact disc
containing complete texts of all the documents.
Comments and requests should be received by the end of the comment period (visit http://arctic.fws.gov/ccp.htm for the
comments due date). Submit comments to:
Sharon Seim, Planning Team Leader Email: ArcticRefugeCCP@fws.gov
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Phone: 907-456-0501 or 800-362-4546
101 12th Ave, Rm 236
Fairbanks AK 99701
Additional information about the planning process:
web: http://arctic.fws.gov/ccp.htm
email: ArcticRefugeCCP@fws.gov
phone: 907-456-0501 or 800-362-4546
Information about Arctic Refuge:
web: http://arctic.fws.gov/
facebook: facebook.com/arcticnationalwildliferefuge
email: arctic_refuge@fws.gov
phone: 907-456-0250 or 800-362-4546
Thank you for participating in our planning process!
Your comments will help us prepare a better plan for the future of Arctic Refuge.
This page intentionally left blank.
Table of Contents
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan v
Table of Contents
Title Page .............................................................................................................................................................. i
Dear Reader Letter ........................................................................................................................................... iii
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................ v
Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................... xvii
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Need for Action ....................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Planning Context........................................................................................................................... 1-5
1.2.1 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service .............................................................................. 1-5
1.2.2 The National Wildlife Refuge System.......................................................................... 1-5
1.2.3 Principles for Managing the National Wildlife Refuge System ................................ 1-6
1.3 Legal and Policy Context ............................................................................................................... 1-9
1.3.1 Legal Guidance ............................................................................................................... 1-9
1.3.2 Policy Guidance .............................................................................................................. 1-9
1.3.3 Coordination with the State of Alaska ....................................................................... 1-10
1.3.4 Coordination with Tribes ............................................................................................. 1-11
1.3.5 Coordination with Cooperating Agencies .................................................................. 1-11
1.4 Arctic Refuge Establishment and Purposes ............................................................................... 1-12
1.4.1 Initial Establishment of the Arctic Range and the Purposes Set Forth ................ 1-12
1.4.2 The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act ........................................... 1-18
1.5 Special Values of Arctic Refuge.................................................................................................. 1-20
1.5.1 Wilderness Characteristics ......................................................................................... 1-20
1.5.2 Ecological Values ......................................................................................................... 1-20
1.5.3 Wildlife Values .............................................................................................................. 1-20
1.5.4 Rivers ............................................................................................................................ 1-20
1.5.5 Landscape Scale and Features ................................................................................... 1-21
1.5.6 Scientific Values ........................................................................................................... 1-21
1.5.7 Native Culture and Subsistence ................................................................................. 1-22
1.5.8 Historic and Heritage Values ...................................................................................... 1-22
1.5.9 Recreational Values ..................................................................................................... 1-22
1.5.10 Hunting Values ............................................................................................................. 1-22
1.5.11 A Symbolic Value ......................................................................................................... 1-22
1.6 Arctic Refuge Vision and Goals ................................................................................................... 1-23
1.6.1 Refuge Vision Statement ............................................................................................. 1-23
1.6.2 Refuge Goals ................................................................................................................. 1-23
Table of Contents
vi Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.7 Planning Requirements ............................................................................................................... 1-25
1.8 The Planning Process.................................................................................................................. 1-26
1.8.1 Design the Process ....................................................................................................... 1-27
1.8.2 Initiate Public Involvement and Scoping ................................................................... 1-27
1.8.3 Identify Significant Issues ........................................................................................... 1-28
1.8.4 Develop and Analyze Alternatives .............................................................................. 1-29
1.8.5 Prepare Draft Plan and Environmental Impact Statement .................................... 1-29
1.8.6 Prepare and Adopt a Final Plan ................................................................................. 1-29
1.8.7 Implement Plan, Monitor, and Evaluate.................................................................... 1-29
1.8.8 Review and Revise Plan ............................................................................................... 1-29
1.9 Planning Issues ............................................................................................................................ 1-31
1.10 Significant Planning Issues ........................................................................................................ 1-31
2. Goals, Objectives, Management Policies, and Guidelines .................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Refuge Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................ 2-1
2.2 Overview of Management Policies and Guidelines .................................................................. 2-31
2.3 Management Categories ............................................................................................................. 2-31
2.3.1 Intensive Management ................................................................................................ 2-31
2.3.2 Moderate Management ................................................................................................ 2-32
2.3.3 Minimal Management .................................................................................................. 2-32
2.3.4 Wilderness Management ............................................................................................. 2-33
2.3.5 Wild River Management .............................................................................................. 2-35
2.3.6 Special Management Areas ......................................................................................... 2-35
2.4 Management Policies and Guidelines ........................................................................................ 2-37
2.4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 2-37
2.4.2 Human Safety and Management Emergencies ........................................................ 2-37
2.4.3 Land Exchanges and Acquisitions .............................................................................. 2-37
2.4.4 Land Protection Plans ................................................................................................. 2-38
2.4.5 Appropriate Refuge Uses ............................................................................................ 2-38
2.4.6 Compatibility Determinations ..................................................................................... 2-40
2.4.7 Mitigation ...................................................................................................................... 2-41
2.4.8 Coastal Zone Consistency............................................................................................ 2-42
2.4.9 Cooperation and Coordination with Others ............................................................... 2-44
2.4.10 Ecosystem and Landscape Management .................................................................. 2-46
2.4.11 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management..................................................................... 2-50
2.4.12 Fish and Wildlife Population Management ............................................................... 2-52
2.4.13 Subsistence Management ............................................................................................ 2-57
Table of Contents
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan vii
2.4.14 Public Access and Transportation Management ...................................................... 2-59
2.4.15 Recreation and Other Public Use ............................................................................... 2-63
2.4.16 Public Use Facilities .................................................................................................... 2-64
2.4.17 Outreach and Education .............................................................................................. 2-65
2.4.18 Commercial Use Management .................................................................................... 2-66
2.4.19 Environmental Contaminants Identification and Cleanup ...................................... 2-69
2.4.20 Management of Designated Wilderness .................................................................... 2-70
2.4.21 Administration of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge ............................................ 2-71
2.4.22 Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program ....................................................... 2-72
2.5 Management Categories Table ................................................................................................... 2-73
2.5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 2-73
2.5.2 Definitions for Management Categories Table ......................................................... 2-73
3. Issues and Alternatives ........................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Issues ............................................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.1.1 Significant Issues ........................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.2 Issues Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study ........................................... 3-6
3.1.3 Other Actions, Options, and Strategies........................................................................ 3-7
3.2 Alternatives .................................................................................................................................. 3-10
3.2.1 Management Actions Common to All Alternatives .................................................. 3-10
3.2.2 Alternative A – Current Management ....................................................................... 3-14
3.2.3 Alternative B................................................................................................................. 3-18
3.2.4 Alternative C................................................................................................................. 3-23
3.2.5 Alternative D ................................................................................................................. 3-28
3.2.6 Alternative E ................................................................................................................ 3-34
3.2.7 Alternative F................................................................................................................. 3-40
3.3 Comparison of the Alternatives ................................................................................................... 3-47
3.3.1 Summary of Alternatives by Major Issues ................................................................ 3-47
3.3.2 Comparison of Old and New Management Policies and Guidelines ....................... 3-47
3.4 Evaluation of Alternatives ............................................................................................................ 3-53
3.4.1 Evaluation Criteria ...................................................................................................... 3-53
3.4.2 Response to Refuge Purposes .................................................................................... 3-53
3.4.3 Response to National Wildlife Refuge System Mission ........................................... 3-54
3.4.4 Response to Refuge Goals ........................................................................................... 3-54
3.4.5 Response to Issues ....................................................................................................... 3-54
3.4.6 Response to Biological Integrity and Ecosystem Management ............................. 3-56
4. Affected Environment .............................................................................................................................. 4-1
Table of Contents
viii Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
4.1 Geographic Setting ........................................................................................................................ 4-1
4.1.1 Refuge History ............................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.2 Land Status ..................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.1.3 Special Designations ...................................................................................................... 4-9
4.2 Physical Environment .................................................................................................................. 4-16
4.2.1 Landforms and Geology ............................................................................................... 4-16
4.2.2 Climate ........................................................................................................................... 4-22
4.2.3 Climate Change ............................................................................................................ 4-26
4.2.4 Air Quality ..................................................................................................................... 4-30
4.2.5 Soils ............................................................................................................................... 4-31
4.2.6 Permafrost .................................................................................................................... 4-32
4.2.7 Oil and Gas Occurrences and Potential ...................................................................... 4-35
4.2.8 Minerals ......................................................................................................................... 4-36
4.2.9 Water Resources .......................................................................................................... 4-37
4.3 Biological Environment ............................................................................................................... 4-42
4.3.1 Land Cover and Vegetation ........................................................................................ 4-42
4.3.2 Wildfire .......................................................................................................................... 4-50
4.3.3 Climate Change Impacts to Vegetation ..................................................................... 4-53
4.3.4 Climate Change and Refuge Habitats ....................................................................... 4-55
4.3.5 Fish ............................................................................................................................... 4-59
4.3.6 Birds .............................................................................................................................. 4-71
4.3.7 Mammals ....................................................................................................................... 4-86
4.4 Human Environment.................................................................................................................... 4-120
4.4.1 Cultural and Historical Context................................................................................ 4-120
4.4.2 Transportation and Access ........................................................................................ 4-128
4.4.3 Description of the Socioeconomic Environment ..................................................... 4-132
4.4.4 Subsistence Uses ........................................................................................................ 4-164
4.4.5 Visitor Use and Recreation ....................................................................................... 4-207
4.4.6 Interpretation and Environmental Education ........................................................ 4-229
4.5 Refuge Infrastructure and Administration ................................................................................ 4-233
4.5.1 Administrative Facilities ........................................................................................... 4-233
4.5.2 Refuge Staffing ........................................................................................................... 4-238
5. Environmental Consequences ................................................................................................................. 5-1
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.1 Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.2 Cumulative Effects ......................................................................................................... 5-2
Table of Contents
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan ix
5.1.3 Impact Topics ................................................................................................................. 5-3
5.2 Effects Common to Alternatives ................................................................................................... 5-4
5.2.1 Management Policies and Guidelines ........................................................................... 5-4
5.2.2 Wilderness Review ......................................................................................................... 5-8
5.2.3 Rivers Reviewed for Wild and Scenic Potential .......................................................... 5-8
5.2.4 Common Effects of the Alternatives on Resource Categories .................................. 5-9
5.3 Effects of Alternative A (Current Management) ......................................................................... 5-14
5.3.1 Impacts to the Biophysical Environment from Alternative A ................................. 5-14
5.3.2 Impacts to the Human Environment from Alternative A ........................................ 5-17
5.3.3 Cumulative Effects of Alternative A .......................................................................... 5-20
5.4 Effects of Alternative B ................................................................................................................ 5-21
5.4.1 Impacts to the Biophysical Environment from Alternative B ................................. 5-22
5.4.2 Impacts to the Human Environment from Alternative B ........................................ 5-26
5.4.3 Cumulative Effects of Alternative B .......................................................................... 5-32
5.5 Effects of Alternative C ................................................................................................................ 5-33
5.5.1 Impacts to the Biophysical Environment from Alternative C .............................. 5-33
5.5.2 Impacts to the Human Environment from Alternative C ........................................ 5-38
5.5.3 Cumulative Effects of Alternative C .......................................................................... 5-43
5.6 Effects of Alternative D ................................................................................................................ 5-44
5.6.1 Impacts to the Biophysical Environment from Alternative D ................................ 5-45
5.6.2 Impacts to the Human Environment from Alternative D ....................................... 5-49
5.6.3 Cumulative Impacts of Alternative D ........................................................................ 5-55
5.7 Effects of Alternative E ................................................................................................................ 5-56
5.7.1 Impacts to the Biophysical Environment from Alternative E ................................ 5-57
5.7.2 Impacts to the Human Environment from Alternative E ....................................... 5-60
5.7.3 Cumulative Impacts of Alternative E ........................................................................ 5-67
5.8 Effects of Alternative F ................................................................................................................. 5-68
5.8.1 Impacts to the Biophysical Environment from Alternative F ................................. 5-68
5.8.2 Impacts to the Human Environment from Alternative F ........................................ 5-71
5.8.3 Cumulative Impacts of Alternative F ........................................................................ 5-75
5.9 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................................................................. 5-76
5.10 Section 810 Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 5-87
5.11 Environmental Justice .................................................................................................................. 5-88
5.11.1 Effects of Alternative A ............................................................................................... 5-89
5.11.2 Effects of Alternative B ............................................................................................... 5-91
5.11.3 Effects of Alternative C ............................................................................................... 5-93
Table of Contents
x Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
5.11.4 Effects of Alternative D ............................................................................................... 5-95
5.11.5 Effects of Alternative E ............................................................................................... 5-96
5.11.6 Effects of Alternative F ............................................................................................... 5-97
5.11.7 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 5-98
5.12 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources ........................................................ 5-99
5.13 Relationship Between Local Short-term Uses and Maintenance and
Enhancement of Long-term Productivity ................................................................................... 5-99
5.14 Unavoidable Adverse Effects ...................................................................................................... 5-99
6. Implementation and Monitoring .............................................................................................................. 6-1
6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Current Step-Down Plans ............................................................................................................. 6-1
6.2.1 Fire Management Plan .................................................................................................. 6-1
6.3 Future Step-Down Plans ............................................................................................................... 6-3
6.3.1 Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan ..................................................... 6-3
6.3.2 Comprehensive River Management Plan .................................................................... 6-3
6.3.3 Ecological Inventory & Monitoring Plan ..................................................................... 6-3
6.3.4 Research Plan ................................................................................................................. 6-4
6.3.5 Wilderness Stewardship Plan ....................................................................................... 6-5
6.3.6 Visitor Use Management Plan ...................................................................................... 6-5
6.3.7 Land Protection Plan ..................................................................................................... 6-6
6.4 Partnership Opportunities ............................................................................................................. 6-7
6.5 Implementation .............................................................................................................................. 6-8
6.6 Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................................ 6-9
6.7 Plan Amendment and Revision ................................................................................................... 6-10
Table of Contents
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan xi
List of Maps
Map 1-1. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge ...................................................................................................... 1-3
Map 1-2. National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska .............................................................................................. 1-7
Map 1-3. Adjacent Landowners .................................................................................................................... 1-13
Map 1-4. Arctic National Wildlife Range ..................................................................................................... 1-15
Map 3-1. Alternative A .................................................................................................................................. 3-15
Map 3-2. Alternative B .................................................................................................................................. 3-19
Map 3-3. Alternative C .................................................................................................................................. 3-25
Map 3-4. Alternative D ................................................................................................................................. 3-29
Map 3-5. Alternative E ................................................................................................................................. 3-35
Map 3-6. Alternative F .................................................................................................................................. 3-41
Map 4-1. Surface Estate Land Status ............................................................................................................ 4-3
Map 4-2. Special Designated Areas .............................................................................................................. 4-11
Map 4-3. Alaska Ecoregions .......................................................................................................................... 4-17
Map 4-4. Land Cover Types .......................................................................................................................... 4-43
Map 4-5. Fire History 1942-2010 .................................................................................................................. 4-51
Map 4-6. Frequency of Occurrence of Snow Goose Flocks with Greater Than 500 birds
Observed During Aerial Surveys, 1982-2004 ........................................................................ 4-75
Map 4-7. Habitats and Numbers of Shorebirds Detected on Plots during Surveys, 2002 and
2004 .......................................................................................................................................... 4-81
Map 4-8. Range of the Central Arctic and Porcupine Caribou Herds ...................................................... 4-93
Map 4-9. Porcupine Caribou Herd Calving Area ........................................................................................ 4-99
Map 4-10. Observations, Satellite-Collar, and Radio-Telemetry Locations of Denning
Female Polar Bears 1910-2010............................................................................................. 4-109
Map 4-11. Exclusive Commercial Hunting Guide Use Areas .................................................................. 4-153
Map 4-12. Arctic Village Subsistence Areas for Moose, Caribou, and Dall’s Sheep. ............................ 4-169
Map 4-13. Arctic Village Subsistence Areas for Fish, Wildfowl, and Wood ........................................... 4-171
Map 4-14. Arctic Village Subsistence Areas for Bears, Small Mammals, and Furbearers .................. 4-173
Map 4-15. Village of Chalkyitsik Subsistence Areas for Bear, Moose, Caribou and
Furbearers ............................................................................................................................. 4-179
Map 4-16. Fort Yukon Subsistence Areas for Caribou, Moose and Trapping (Furbearers) ............... 4-183
Map 4-17. Kaktovik Subsistence Areas for Caribou ................................................................................. 4-191
Map 4-18. Kaktovik Subsistence Areas for Bowhead Whales and Seals ................................................ 4-193
Map 4-19. Kaktovik Subsistence Areas for Fish ....................................................................................... 4-195
Map 4-20. Venetie Subsistence Areas for Bear, Caribou, and Moose .................................................... 4-199
Map 4-21. Venetie Subsistence Areas for Furbearers, Small Mammals, and Wildfowl. ...................... 4-201
Map 4-22. Venetie Subsistence Areas for Fish, Plants/Berries, and Wood ........................................... 4-203
Table of Contents
xii Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Map 4-23. Wiseman Subsistence Use Areas .............................................................................................. 4-205
Map 4-24. Alaska Game Management Units ............................................................................................. 4-219
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. The Planning Process ................................................................................................................ 1-26
Figure 4-1. Projected increases in temperature and precipitation in Arctic Refuge. ............................. 4-27
Figure 4-2. Shorebird density on Arctic Refuge delta mudflats observed during surveys,
2007–2009. ............................................................................................................................... 4-83
Figure 4-3. Diversity of mammals in Alaska and Arctic Refuge, shown as a percentage of
mammal species present in North America. ......................................................................... 4-87
Figure 4-4. Population trends of the Porcupine, Central Arctic and Teshepuk caribou
herds in northern Alaska, Data sources: Lenart 2007a, b; Carroll 2007;
Arthur and Vecchio 2009. ........................................................................................................ 4-92
Figure 4-5. Dall’s sheep population trends in two northern drainages, Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge, Alaska. Data sources: Caikoski 2008, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service unpublished data ...................................................................................................... 4-101
Figure 4-6. Hunter success and number of Dall's sheep killed by all general hunters in
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska 1988–2007. Data source: U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service unpublished data summarized from ADFG harvest
records ................................................................................................................................... 4-101
Figure 4-7. Abundance of muskoxen in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (Unit 26C) and
adjacent regions 1982–2010. Data sources: Reynolds 2006; Lenart 2007c;
Cooley and McDonald 2010; Reynolds 2010; S. Arthur, wildlife biologist,
ADFG, pers. comm. ............................................................................................................... 4-104
Figure 4-8. Moose counts during fall surveys of North Slope drainages between the
Canning River and Accomplishment Creek, 1986–2008 Data source: Lenart
2008. ....................................................................................................................................... 4-107
Figure 4-9. Moose counts along Sheenjek and Colleen Rivers south of the Brooks Range
Mountains and southern reaches of the Kongakut and Firth-Mancha
drainages, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, 1989–2004. Data source:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arctic ................................................................................. 4-107
Figure 4-10. Population trends for Arctic Refuge communities. ............................................................. 4-140
Figure 4-11. Projected change in population. Projected change in population...................................... 4-142
Figure 4-12. Numbers of commercial permits issues by Arctic Refuge, 1980–2009 (excludes
hunt guide permits). .............................................................................................................. 4-210
Figure 4-13. Total number of documented visitors at Arctic Refuge based on client use
reports and voluntary reports from Toolik Lake and Coldfoot Visitor Center,
2001–2009. .............................................................................................................................. 4-211
Figure 4-14. Comparison of guided and non-guided commercially-supported visitors to
Arctic Refuge, 2001–2009...................................................................................................... 4-212
Figure 4-15. Comparison of guided and non-guided commercially-supported visitors to
Arctic Refuge, 2001–2009...................................................................................................... 4-213
Table of Contents
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan xiii
Figure 4-16. Mean daily distribution of commercially-supported visitors on the Kongakut
River in Arctic Refuge, 2001–2009....................................................................................... 4-216
Figure 4-17. Harvest information (except caribou) from Game Management Units of
Arctic Refuge over the 20-year period 1988–2008. Trapping harvest includes
lynx, wolf, wolverine, and otter. ........................................................................................... 4-221
Figure 4-18. Caribou harvests from Game Management Units of Arctic Refuge during the
20-year period 1998–2008 (includes harvest on State-owned lands). ............................... 4-221
Figure 4-19. Hunting (excluding caribou) and trapping records (not number of hunters and
trappers) returned to ADFG from Game Management Units 25A, 26B, and
26C during the 10-year period 1998–2008. ........................................................................... 4-222
Figure 4-20.Trapping records of furbearers (lynx, wolf, wolverine, and otter) harvested in
GMUs 25A, 26B and 26C during the 20-year period 1988–2008. ...................................... 4-223
Figure 4-21. Hunting records from Game Management Unit 25A for harvest of each big
game species over the 20-year period 1988–2008. .............................................................. 4-224
Figure 4-22. Harvest records (excluding caribou) from Game Management Unit 26B over
the 20-year period 1998-2008. ............................................................................................... 4-224
Figure 4-23. Caribou harvest records from Game Management Unit 26B for Arctic
Refuge, 1998–2008 (includes harvest on State-owned lands). ........................................... 4-225
Figure 4-24. Harvest records for each big game species from GMU 26C during the 10-year
period 1998–2008. .................................................................................................................. 4-225
Figure 4-25. Number of hits for most popular webpages for Arctic Refuge, fiscal year
2010. ....................................................................................................................................... 4-230
List of Tables
Table 1-1. Location, dates, and attendance of public meetings ................................................................. 1-28
Table 2-1. Activities, public uses, commercial activities or uses, and facilities by
management category. ............................................................................................................ 2-75
Table 3-1. Comparison of alternatives by major planning issue and budget and staff
requirements. ........................................................................................................................... 3-45
Table 3-2. Differences between current management direction in the 1988 Arctic Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan (Alternative A) and the new management
direction proposed in this Plan (including Alternatives B, C, D, E, and F). ........................ 3-48
Table 3-3. Key differences between Minimal and Wilderness Management categories ........................ 3-52
Table 4-1. Surface land status as of October 7, 2010 .................................................................................... 4-5
Table 4-2. Average temperature, precipitation, snowfall, and snow depth .............................................. 4-23
Table 4-3. Average temperatures in Arctic Refuge ecoregions ................................................................ 4-24
Table 4-4. Projected temperature and precipitation changes in the Refuge ........................................... 4-30
Table 4-5. Land cover classes of Arctic Refuge .......................................................................................... 4-45
Table 4-6. Maximum post-breeding snow goose counts on the Refuge .................................................... 4-73
Table 4-7. Estimated densities, population, and percentage of estimated shorebird
populations in the 1002 Area .................................................................................................. 4-80
Table of Contents
xiv Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Table 4-8. Terrestrial mammals of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge are of special interest
because they are used by humans and are known to be important components
of northern ecosystems ........................................................................................................... 4-89
Table 4-9. Asserted RS 2477 Rights of Way .............................................................................................. 4-130
Table 4-10. Population by selected region ................................................................................................. 4-139
Table 4-11. Socioeconomic characteristics of Arctic Refuge communities ............................................. 4-141
Table 4-12. Projected births, deaths, and net migration 2006–2030 ....................................................... 4-142
Table 4-13. Housing characteristics of Refuge communities compared to State of Alaska .................. 4-144
Table 4-14. Workforce characteristics ........................................................................................................ 4-145
Table 4-15. Employment by industry sector (number of individuals) ..................................................... 4-147
Table 4-16. Employment by industry sector (percent) ............................................................................. 4-149
Table 4-17. Number of people changing their type of employment between 1990 and 2000
in communities near Arctic Refuge; numbers in parentheses indicate a
decrease in the number in that type of employment ......................................................... 4-151
Table 4-18. Commercial recreation and air operations permits .............................................................. 4-156
Table 4-19. Arctic Refuge – total Refuge budget ...................................................................................... 4-160
Table 4-20. Economic impacts associated with 2009 Arctic Refuge budget expenditures.................... 4-161
Table 4-21. Annual cycle of subsistence activities for Arctic Village, 1970–1982 ................................... 4-175
Table 4-22. Annual cycle of subsistence activities for Chalkyitsik, 1970–1982 ...................................... 4-176
Table 4-23. Annual cycle of subsistence activities for Fort Yukon, 1970–1982, 1986–1987................... 4-178
Table 4-24. Annual subsistence cycle for Kaktovik (qualitative presentation) ...................................... 4-182
Table 4-25. Kaktovik community subsistence harvest surveys, major resource categories ................. 4-187
Table 4-26. Estimated caribou harvest by year for Kaktovik .................................................................. 4-188
Table 4-27. Kaktovik estimated fish harvest, sample years 1985–2002 .................................................. 4-188
Table 4-28. Annual cycle of subsistence activities for Venetie, 1970–1982 ............................................. 4-190
Table 5-1. Environmental Effects ................................................................................................................. 5-76
Table 6-1. Timeline for start and completion dates of step-down plans of Arctic Refuge. ...................... 6-6
Table 6-2. Projects and studies to be implemented by Arctic Refuge. ....................................................... 6-8
Table of Contents
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan xv
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Legal, Policy, and Planning Guidance
Appendix B: Consultation and Coordination with Others
Appendix C: Other Planning Efforts
Appendix D: Issues Considered but Not in Detail
Appendix E: Easements, Rights-of-Way, and Withdrawals
Appendix F: Species Lists
Appendix G: Compatibility Determinations
Appendix H: Wilderness Review
Appendix I: Wild and Scenic River Review
Appendix J: Public Scoping Comments
Appendix K: Mailing List
Appendix L: Preparers of the Plan and Planning Team Members
Appendix M: Glossary
Appendix N: Index
Table of Contents
xvi Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Acronyms
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan xvii
Acronyms
ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ADFG Alaska Department of Fish and Game
ADNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources
AIWFMP Alaska Interagency Wildland Fire Management Plan
ANILCA Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
ANCSA Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
ASRC Arctic Slope Regional Corporation
BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BLM-AFS Bureau of Land Management, Alaska Fire Service
CE categorical exclusion
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CRMP Comprehensive River Management Plan
DOI Department of the Interior
EA environmental assessment
EIN easement identification number
EIS environmental impact statement
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FMP Fire Management Plan
FTE full-time employee
FY fiscal year
GIS Geographic Information System
Acronyms
xviii Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
GMU game management unit
I&M Inventory and Monitoring
IACUC Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee
ICRMP Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plan
IWSRCC Interagency Wild and Scenic Rivers Coordinating Council
KIC Kaktovik Iñupiat Corporation
LCC Landscape Conservation Cooperative
LPP Land Protection Plan
MPA Marine Protected Area
MRA Minimum Requirements Analysis
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPS National Park Service
NWPS National Wilderness Preservation System
NWSRS National Wild and Scenic Rivers System
ORV outstandingly remarkable value
PLO Public Land Order
PRISM Program for Regional and International Shorebird Monitoring
PUNA Public Use Natural Area
RNA research natural area
ROC region of comparison
ROD record of decision
SNAP Scenarios Network for Alaska Planning
TUS transportation or utility systems
Acronyms
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan xix
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
VUMP Visitor Use Management Plan
WSA Wilderness Study Area
Acronyms
xx Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-1
1. Introduction
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (Arctic Refuge, Refuge) encompasses approximately 19.3
million acres of land and water in northeastern Alaska (Map 1-1) and is administered by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) as a unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System
(Refuge System). This document is the draft revision of the 1988 Comprehensive Conservation
Plan (Plan, Revised Plan) currently used to manage Arctic Refuge. It describes six
alternatives for revising the 1988 Plan and assesses the effects of implementing each of the
alternatives. When the Revised Plan is finalized, it will replace the current management
direction as described in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive
Conservation Plan/Environmental Impact Statement/Wilderness Review/Wild River Plan
(Service 1988a) and associated record of decision (Service 1988b).
Chapter 1 provides background information on: the framework used to develop this document,
including the reason the Service is revising the existing plan; legal and policy guidance for
Refuge management; an overview of the purposes for establishing the Refuge and the special
values of Arctic Refuge; the Refuge’s vision and goals; and an explanation of the planning
process, including how the public is involved, what planning issues were identified by the
public and Refuge staff, and how these issues are addressed in the Plan.
1.1 Purpose and Need for Action
Comprehensive conservation plans are dynamic documents requiring periodic review and
updating, and much has changed since the initial Arctic Plan was completed in 1988. Revision
of the Plan is also prescribed by Section 304(g) of the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA), as amended, which directs the Secretary of the Interior
to prepare and, from time to time, revise a comprehensive conservation plan for each refuge in
Alaska.
The purpose of this planning process is to develop a Revised Plan for Arctic Refuge to provide
management direction for the next 15 years. The revision follows guidance found in ANILCA
and other Federal laws, primarily the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of
1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, and the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended.
Revising the comprehensive conservation plan allows the Service to do the following:
 Update management direction related to national and regional policies and guidelines
used to implement Federal laws governing Refuge management
o The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act became law in 1997 and
includes new requirements for Refuge management.
o New national policies provide direction for wilderness stewardship, public use,
wildlife conservation, and ecosystem management.
 Describe and protect the resources and special values of Arctic Refuge
 Incorporate new scientific information on resources of the Refuge and surrounding
areas
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-2 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
o New information about Refuge fish, wildlife, and habitats is available. Refuge staff
have learned more about the status of wildlife populations and how these
populations use the Refuge’s lands and resources.
o Climate change has emerged as a factor potentially affecting all aspects of the
Refuge environment; while future effects are uncertain, climate change scenarios
must be considered in management decisions.
o Cumulative effects of industrial development and other uses of lands outside of
Refuge boundaries are potentially significant for the fish, wildlife, and habitats of
the Refuge. Uses of adjacent lands and human demographics have changed since
the last plan was completed, and they must be considered when developing the new
plan.
 Evaluate current Refuge management direction based on changing public use of the
Refuge and its resources
o Public use of the Refuge has changed, contributing to cumulative impacts, potential
conflicts, and concerns about the quality of people’s experiences.
o A Federal Subsistence Management Program was initiated in 1990 in cooperation
with the State of Alaska (State) to ensure federally qualified subsistence users
have a priority opportunity for consumptive use of fish and wildlife resources on
Federal public lands.
o The Dalton Highway was opened to the public in 1994, providing new ways to
access the Refuge and changing patterns of use.
 Ensure the purposes of the Refuge and the mission of the Refuge System are being
fulfilled
 Ensure that opportunities are available for interested parties to participate in the
development of management direction
 Provide a systematic process for making and documenting resource management
decisions
 Establish broad management direction for Refuge programs and activities
 Provide continuity in Refuge management
 Establish a long-term vision for the Refuge
 Establish management goals and objectives
 Define compatible uses
 Provide additional guidance for budget requests
 Provide additional guidance for planning work and evaluating accomplishments
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Be a u fo r t S e a
Camden Bay
Brooks Range
Philip Smith Mts
Sadlerochit Mts
Shublik Mts
Romanzof Mts
Franklin Mts
British Mts
Davidson Mts
Ogilvie Mts
Kaktov ik
Arctic
Villa ge
!(
!(
Kongakut River
Ivishak River
Sagavanirktok River
Canning River
Jago River
Hulahula River
Peters Lake
Porcupine River
Coleen River
Chandalar River
East Fork Chandalar River
Coleen River
Sheenjek River
Wind River
Porcupine River
Old Crow River
Dalton Highway
Old Crow
Canada
Prudhoe
Bay
Venetie
Wiseman
Coldfoot
140° W
140° W
142° W
142° W
144° W
144° W
146° W
146° W
148° W
148° W
150° W
150° W
152° W
152° W
154° W
154° W
70° N
70° N
69° N
69° N
68° N
68° N
67° N
67° N
!
!
Arctic Ocean
Gulf of Alaska
Bering
Sea
Anchorage
Fairbanks
Alaska
Russia
Canada
Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic Projection, 1983 North American Datum.
Map 1-1
Arctic Refuge Boundary
Wilderness Boundary
Roads
U.S.- Canada Border
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Miles
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Kilometers
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-5
1.2 Planning Context
Arctic Refuge is part of a diverse system of more than 550 wildlife refuges stretching across
the nation. Arctic Refuge is administered to meet both its unique establishing purposes and to
serve the broad mission of the Refuge System.
Vast, natural, and wild, Arctic Refuge serves a distinctive function in this system. The Refuge
challenges the Service to think beyond the historic role of refuges as a means to protect or
propagate single species. Rather, the Refuge offers the opportunity to protect all life forms,
their encompassing natural processes, and a range of tangible and intangible values. In
making decisions affecting the future of Arctic Refuge, we remain mindful of the vision shared
by those who fought for its creation—that this should be a place for humility and restraint, for
the Service as well as visitors.
1.2.1 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Part of the Department of the Interior, the Service is the principal Federal agency responsible
for conserving, protecting, and enhancing the nation’s fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats.
In addition to the Refuge System, the Service operates national fish hatcheries, fishery
resource offices, and ecological services field stations. The Service enforces Federal wildlife
laws, administers the Endangered Species Act, manages migratory bird populations, restores
nationally important fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, and
helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It oversees the Federal Aid in
Wildlife Restoration Program, which distributes to State fish and wildlife agencies hundreds
of millions of dollars derived from excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment.
The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is:
“Working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their
habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.”
1.2.2 The National Wildlife Refuge System
The National Wildlife Refuge System comprises more than 145 million acres of Federal lands,
encompassing more than 550 national wildlife refuges, six national monuments, thousands of
small wetlands, and other special management areas. Refuge System lands are located in all
50 states and the territories of the United States.
The Refuge System was created to conserve fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats. This
conservation mission includes providing Americans with opportunities to participate in
compatible wildlife-dependent recreation, including fishing and hunting, on Refuge System
lands and to better appreciate the value of and need for fish and wildlife conservation.
There are 16 national wildlife refuges in Alaska (Map 1-2). These refuge lands contain a wide
range of habitats with varied terrain, including mountains, glaciers, tundra, grasslands,
wetlands, lakes, woodlands, and rivers. Together, the 16 refuges comprise 76.8 million acres
and constitute about 53 percent of the Refuge System.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-6 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
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 Administration Act of 1966,
as amended)
1.2.3 Principles for Managing the National Wildlife Refuge System
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (Refuge Administration
Act), as amended, states that each refuge shall be managed to fulfill both the purposes for
which the individual refuge was established and the mission of the Refuge System. When
there is a conflict between refuge purposes and the mission, the purposes of the refuge shall
take priority. The act requires that any use of a refuge support the purposes of the refuge and
not materially interfere with or detract from the purposes of the refuge or fulfillment of the
mission of the System.
The 1997 amendments to the Refuge Administration Act identified a number of principles to
guide management of the Refuge System. They include the following:
 Conserve fish, wildlife, and plants, and their habitats within the Refuge System
 Maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge
System
 Carry out the mission of the Refuge System and the purposes of each refuge (except
that if a conflict exists, refuge purposes are protected first)
 Coordinate, interact, and cooperate with adjacent landowners and State fish and wildlife
agencies
 Maintain adequate water quantity and water quality to meet refuge and Refuge System
purposes and acquire necessary water rights under State law
 Maintain hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental
education and interpretation as the priority general public uses of the Refuge System
 Provide opportunities for compatible wildlife-dependent public uses within the Refuge
System
 Provide enhanced consideration for wildlife-dependent uses over other public uses in
planning and management within the Refuge System
 Provide increased opportunities for families to experience compatible wildlife-dependent
recreation, particularly traditional outdoor activities such as fishing and hunting; and
 Monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants within each refuge
To maintain the health of individual refuges, and the Refuge System as a whole, managers
must anticipate future conditions. Managers must endeavor to avoid adverse impacts and take
positive actions to conserve and protect refuge resources. Effective management also depends
on acknowledging resource relationships and acknowledging that refuges are parts of larger
ecosystems. Refuge managers work together with partners—including other refuges, Federal
and State agencies, tribal and other governments, Native organizations and entities, and non-governmental
organizations and groups—to protect, conserve, enhance, or restore native fish,
wildlife, plants, and their habitats.
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Kakto vik
Arctic
Village
!(
!(
Canada
Unalaska
Anchorage
Tok
Fairbanks
Venetie
Barrow
Kaktovik
Nome
Bethel
Kodiak
Cold Bay
Dillingham
Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic Projection, 1983 North American Datum.
Arctic NWR
Yukon Flats
NWR
Kanuti
NWR
Selawik NWR
Nowitna
NWR
Koyukuk NWR
Innoko
NWR
Innoko NWR
Yukon Delta
NWR
Togiak
NWR
Tetlin
NWR
Kenai
NWR
Kodiak NWR
Becharof NWR
Alaska Peninsula NWR
Izembek NWR
Yukon Territory
Alaska
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
Alaska Maritime
NWR
03-0116
G u l f o f A l a s k a
B e r i n g S e a
A r c t i c O c e a n
Map 1-2
National Wildlife Refuges
in Alaska
A l a s k a M a r i t i m e N W R
0 60 120 180 240 300
Miles
0 60 120 180 240 300
Kilometers
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Other National Wildlife Refuges
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-9
1.3 Legal and Policy Context
Most refuges are created by legislation or executive action that defines the purpose for
creating the unit and largely dictates how the refuge will be managed. However, management
is also guided by other laws, regulations, and policies, and in the case of Alaska refuges,
agreements with the State of Alaska. This section identifies the laws and the policy guidance
that are integral in the development of this Plan.
1.3.1 Legal Guidance
Operation and management of refuges throughout the Refuge System are influenced by a
wide array of laws, treaties, and Executive orders. Among the most important are the Refuge
System Administration Act, as amended by the Refuge System Improvement Act; the Refuge
Recreation Act; and the Endangered Species Act. Brief descriptions of these and other
pertinent legal documents that influence management of Arctic Refuge are in Appendix A.
Established in 1960, the Arctic National Wildlife Range (Arctic Range, Range) was created to
preserve its unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreational values. These purposes continue to
guide management of lands in the original Range. ANILCA, as amended, expanded and re-designated
the Range as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and provided additional purposes
that guide management of the entire Refuge. For Arctic Refuge and other national wildlife
refuges in Alaska, ANILCA provides key management direction. ANILCA sets forth the
purposes of the Refuge, defines provisions for planning and management, and authorizes
studies and programs related to wildlife and wildland resources, subsistence opportunities,
and recreation and economic uses. ANILCA also provides specific direction for the
management of designated wilderness areas and wilderness study areas in the State of Alaska.
By Refuge System policy, wilderness reviews are required elements of comprehensive
conservation plans. The purpose of the wilderness review is to identify and recommend to
Congress lands and waters that merit inclusion as part of the National Wilderness
Preservation System. The Service is conducting a wilderness review as part of this Revised
Plan (see Appendix H). Each alternative in this document includes a wilderness
recommendation based on this evaluation and the management directions of the alternative.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 established the National Wild and Scenic Rivers
System, allowing Congress to designate certain rivers as wild, scenic, or recreational. It
authorized the Secretary of the Interior to study areas and submit proposals to the President
and the Congress for addition to the system. This document includes a review of Refuge rivers
and their potential for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
1.3.2 Policy Guidance
Programmatic guidance and policy documents provide additional direction for management of
national wildlife refuges. These documents include:
 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Manual
 Director’s orders
 National policies
 Handbooks
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-10 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
 Director’s memoranda
 Regional directives
Although it is not practical to provide information about all of these documents in this Plan,
they are critical to management of the Refuge. Much of the management direction described
in Chapter 2, and in other parts of this Plan, is influenced by guidance from these
programmatic and policy documents.
Several of these documents direct that an ecosystem approach be used in Refuge
management. In other words, we must consider the health of the entire ecosystem when
managing Arctic Refuge. This concept requires close coordination with other stakeholders.
Appendix B describes the coordination and consultation conducted during the planning
process, and Appendix C provides a brief description of the national and regional management
plans and programs considered during development of this Plan.
1.3.3 Coordination with the State of Alaska
This Plan was developed in consultation with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADFG) and the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR). The Service routinely
consulted with ADFG and ADNR personnel during the planning process, and representatives
from these agencies were on the planning team.
ADFG has primary responsibility for managing Alaska’s resident fish and wildlife populations.
On Refuge lands, the Service and ADFG share responsibility for all fish and wildlife resources
and their habitats, and both are engaged in fish and wildlife conservation, management, and
protection programs. In 1982, the Service and ADFG signed a Master Memorandum of
Understanding that defines the cooperative management roles of each agency and sets the
framework for cooperation between the two agencies (Appendix B). The Service and ADFG
recommitted to this formal agreement in 2006.
The State of Alaska establishes fishing, hunting, and trapping regulations at the direction of
the Alaska Boards of Fisheries and Game. These regulations apply to Federal public lands
unless superseded by Federal regulations. If the Service determines restrictions on hunting or
fishing are needed, they are implemented through a rule making or through closures or
restrictions under 50 CFR 36.42 or through Federal Subsistence Board regulations in 50 CFR
100.10(d)(4).
The State is divided into 26 game management units (GMUs), most of which are further
divided into subunits. Management objectives are developed for game populations in each
GMU. ADFG management objectives for the Refuge’s big-game and fish populations are
described in Chapter 4.
ADNR, a key management partner, manages all State-owned land, water, and surface and
subsurface resources except fish and wildlife. ADNR’s Division of Mining, Land, and Water
manages the State’s water and land interests in the Refuge, including water rights, navigable
waters, submerged lands under navigable waters, and rights-of-way over Refuge lands. The
division is also responsible for developing management plans for State lands. Appendix B
provides additional information about key State programs.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-11
1.3.4 Coordination with Tribes
The United States has a unique legal and political relationship with Alaska Native tribal
governments. The United States recognizes Alaska Native tribes as sovereign governments
that are self-governing under Federal law. Under its “trust responsibility” to tribes, the
Federal government has an obligation to protect tribal resources and uphold the rights of
indigenous peoples to govern themselves on tribal lands. In recognition of this relationship,
and pursuant to Executive Order 13175 (November 6, 2000), the Department of the Interior’s
Alaska Policy on Government-to-Government Relations (January 18, 2001), and the
President’s Executive Memorandum on Tribal Consultation (November 5, 2009), the Refuge
has sought to engage in regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal
officials in the development of the Revised Plan. We have consulted with nine tribes having
geographic or cultural ties to Arctic Refuge. For detailed information on tribal coordination
conducted as part of this planning effort, see Appendix B.
1.3.5 Coordination with Cooperating Agencies
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations(40 CFR parts 1500–1508) and
Department of Interior (DOI) NEPA implementing regulations (43 CFR Part 46) require lead
agencies to request participation of cooperating agencies early in the NEPA process.
Cooperating agencies are any Federal, State, tribal, or local government, including Native
corporations, that have jurisdiction by law or special expertise, such as relevant capabilities or
knowledge.
Arctic Refuge is surrounded by lands and waters managed by other Federal agencies or non-
Federal entities, including State, tribal, and Canadian governments (Map 1-3). We contacted
11 of these agencies and governments to ask whether they would be interested in cooperating
agency status. Appendix B provides details about cooperating agency coordination.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-12 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.4 Arctic Refuge Establishment and Purposes
The purposes for which the Arctic National Wildlife Range was established in 1960, and
expanded and re-designated in 1980 as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, provide the
foundation for determining the future conditions of the Refuge, the opportunities it will
provide, and related administrative provisions. The Refuge’s special values, vision statement,
goals, and objectives are rooted in these purposes.
1.4.1 Initial Establishment of the Arctic Range and the Purposes Set Forth
In the mid-1950s, national and Alaskan conservationists and sportsmen embarked on a long,
hard-fought campaign to preserve the northeast corner of Alaska, initially referred to as “The
Last Great Wilderness” (Collins and Sumner 1953). Concerned by the rapid loss of wildlands
in the lower 48 states following World War II, proponents sought to establish a vast
ecosystem-scale conservation unit, intended to be unprecedented not only in size, but also in
the range of values and opportunities its preservation would perpetuate.
Olaus and Margaret Murie of the Wilderness Society, and other leaders of the effort, decided
that status as a national wildlife range, administered by the Service, would be most politically
feasible and most likely to protect the area’s special values and opportunities. In 1957, the
Fairbanks-based Tanana Valley Sportsmen’s Association petitioned the DOI to establish the
Arctic Range. Their proposal requested perpetuation of the area’s “primeval features,”
“maintenance of undisturbed ecological conditions,” and “preservation of wilderness
conditions” (Tanana Valley Sportsmen’s Association 1959). Innumerable conservation, civic,
scientific, and sportsmen’s organizations joined in lobbying for the area’s preservation.
Although there was widespread support for the proposal, there were many opponents as well,
and the issue was hotly debated in Alaska and elsewhere. The Alaska Department of Mines,
the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce, and both of Alaska’s senators were among those that
voiced their opposition. Critics argued the proposal would hinder development of the area and
limit game management options, among other concerns.
On December 6, 1960, the Eisenhower administration established the 8.9-million-acre Arctic
National Wildlife Range through Public Land Order 2214 (Map 1-4). Its brief statement of
purpose proclaimed that the Range was established “to preserve unique wildlife, wilderness,
and recreational values.” Never before had a wildlife range or refuge been established to
“preserve . . . values.” An extensive body of congressional testimony, numerous historic
reports and records, and secondary source materials provide understanding of these three
founding values (Kaye 2006). These sources provide the context for our mandate to preserve
these values. Research in the fields of biology, ecology, and wilderness and recreation
management guide our development of policies, practices, and specific provisions for meeting
this mandate.
1.4.1.1 Wildlife Purpose
One purpose of the Arctic Range was to protect wildlife and its habitat. The leaders of the
campaign to establish the Range intended the word “wildlife” to refer to all indigenous species
and that natural behavior, interactions, and cycles would continue without human
manipulation. In the words of campaign leader Olaus Murie, the intention was to maintain
Dalton Highway
147°W
147°W
146°W
146°W 138°W 137°W
139°W
139°W
140°W
140°W
141°W
141°W
142°W
142°W
143°W
143°W
144°W
144°W
145°W
145°W
148°W
148°W
149°W
149°W
150°W
150°W
151°W
151°W
152°W
152°W
153°W
153°W
154°W
156°W 155°W 154°W
70°N
70°N
69°N
69°N
68°N
68°N
67°N
67°N
!
!
Arctic Oc ean
Gulf of Alaska
Bering
Sea
Anchorage
Fairbanks
Alaska
Russia
Canada
Map Area
Kaktovik
B e a u f o r t S e a
Prudhoe
Bay
Arctic
Village
Venetie
Fort Chalkyitsik
Yukon
Yukon Territory
Alaska
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Beaver
Birch Creek
Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic Projection, 1983 North American Datum.
Map 1-3
03-0118
0 10 20 30 40 50Miles
0 10 20 30 40 50Kilometers
Land Ownership near
Arctic Refuge
Note
This map shows only generalized land ownership.
Small parcels do not appear at this scale.
Alaska Native
Bureau of Land Management
National Park Service
National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska
State Land Disposals
State of Alaska
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Military
Herschel Island
Territorial Park
Ivvavik National Park
Vuntut National Park
Old Crow Flats
Special Management
Area
Fishing
Branch
Wilderness
Fishing Branch Preserve
Habitat Protection Area
Fishing
Branch
Ecological
Reserve
!(
!(
!(
Be au for t Se a
Camden Bay
Kakt ovik
!(
Canada
Kongakut River
Canning River
Hulahula River
Porcupine River
Coleen River
East Fork Chandalar River
Sheenjek River
Dalton Highway
Prudhoe
Bay
Venetie
Arctic
Village
140° W
142° W
142° W
144° W
144° W
146° W
146° W
148° W
148° W
150° W
150° W
152° W
152° W
70° N
70° N
69° N
69° N
68° N
68° N
67° N
67° N
!
!
Arctic Ocean
Gulf of Alaska
Bering
Sea
Anchorage
Fairbanks
Alaska
Russia
Canada
Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic Projection, 1983 North American Datum.
Established on December 6, 1960 by executive order, the Range was
renamed the William O. Douglas National Wildlife Range before being
incorporated into the new Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on
December 2, 1980.
.
Map 1-4
Arctic National Wildlife Range
1960 - 1980
Arctic Range Boundary
Roads
U.S.- Canada Border
0 10 20 30 40 50
Miles
0 10 20 30 40 50
Kilometers
Brooks Range
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-17
“the whole assemblage of living things which go to make up the rich life of that piece of
country” (Murie 1958). In the context of the emerging science of ecology, “wildlife value”
emphasized the interrelatedness of all life forms and their environments, and the integrity of
the underlying ecological and evolutionary processes. For many, caribou became the symbol of
an untrammeled landscape, a wilderness free of the human intent to alter, control, and
subjugate nature for utilitarian purposes.
1.4.1.2 Wilderness Purpose
The wilderness purpose of the Range encompassed a range of values—tangible and
intangible—including but not limited to preservation of the area’s natural, scenic condition and
the wild character of its creatures and natural processes.
The Range was to serve as a natural laboratory—a place to study how nature functions when
left alone. The area’s “great scientific value,” as characterized by plant ecologist Leslie Viereck
(1959), was that it could serve “as a basis for understanding changes that take place in other
areas disturbed by man.��� Also inherent in the wilderness purpose was a cultural heritage value.
This was to be a living legacy, a remnant of the American wilderness that helped shape our
national character and identity and the sense of a “great beyond” that people feared was
vanishing. The Range’s wilderness qualities were to be timeless and its benefits enduring.
There are also less tangible, symbolic, and existence values associated with wilderness. The
Range was perceived as having value in itself and value to those who will never visit but might
find satisfaction and inspiration in just knowing it exists. Its wilderness purpose reflected the
values and attitudes toward nature that its founders were concurrently working to place in
what became the Wilderness Act of 1964. As Range proponent and Wilderness Act author
Howard Zahniser (1956) wrote, “To know the wilderness is to know a profound humility, to
recognize one’s littleness, to sense dependence and interdependence, indebtedness, and
responsibility.” This was to be a place of humility and restraint for managers and visitors.
1.4.1.3 Recreation Purpose
The Range was intended to offer a special kind of recreation, an authentic wildlands
experience of a type increasingly hard to find elsewhere. The recreation purpose provided for
a range of activities, including backpacking, river floating, hunting, fishing, wildlife watching,
photography, and base-camping. But it was the natural, undeveloped character of the setting
that was seen to afford a unique experience. The Refuge’s extreme remoteness, natural
condition, and wild character were to provide a degree of physical and psychological
separation from the reminders of modern civilization unsurpassed anywhere on American soil.
As Range proponent Margaret Murie (1979) wrote, “It was a world that compelled all of our
interest and put everything else out of mind.”
The Range was also to be an adventuring ground, the antithesis of the commercial and
convenience oriented tourism that national parks were promoting at the time. Many agreed with
Olaus Murie that Americans needed areas where enjoyment was earned through effort. Here
the sense of freedom, exploration, and discovery were to prevail; the opportunity to encounter
challenge and experience true independence and self-reliance were to be perpetuated.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-18 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.4.2 The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
On December 2, 1980, Congress passed ANILCA, establishing new Federal conservation units
across the State, enlarging several existing units, and designating wilderness areas and wild
and scenic rivers. ANILCA also provided provisions specifying how these areas were to be
managed, protected, and made available for public use.
ANILCA added 9.2 million acres to the Arctic Range, designated 8 million acres as wilderness,
designated three wild rivers, and changed its name to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Under Section 305 of ANILCA, the Range’s original wildlife, wilderness, and recreation
purposes still apply to those lands in the former Range. ANILCA also added new purposes
that pertain to the entire Refuge. The Refuge’s ANILCA purposes are consistent with and
complementary to the original purposes for the Arctic National Wildlife Range. ANILCA
provided definitions, clarifications, and guidance as to how the Service should carry out the
area’s original and new purposes.
Section 101(b) of ANILCA summarizes the general intent of all conservation system units in
Alaska by stating:
“It is the intent of Congress in this Act to preserve unrivaled scenic and geological values
associated with natural landscapes; to provide for the maintenance of sound populations
of, and habitat for, wildlife species of inestimable value to the citizens of Alaska and the
Nation, including those species dependent on vast relatively undeveloped areas; to
preserve in their natural state extensive unaltered arctic tundra, boreal forest, and
coastal rainforest ecosystems; to protect the resources related to subsistence needs; to
protect and preserve historic and archeological sites, rivers, and lands, and to preserve
wilderness resource values and related recreational opportunities, including but not
limited to hiking, canoeing, fishing, and sport hunting, within large arctic and subarctic
wild lands and on free-flowing rivers; and to maintain opportunities for scientific
research and undisturbed ecosystems.”
1.4.2.1 Arctic Refuge’s Purposes
Section 303(2)(B) of ANILCA set forth the following purposes for Arctic Refuge. ANILCA
purposes are shown in italics.
The purposes for which the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is established and shall be
managed include:
(i) to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity
including, but not limited to, the Porcupine caribou herd (including participation
in coordinating the Western Arctic caribou herd), polar bears, grizzly bears,
muskox, Dall’s sheep, wolves, wolverines, snow geese, peregrine falcons and other
migratory birds, and Arctic char and grayling
Supporting the Refuge’s original intent to be inclusive of all species, ANILCA Section 102 (17)
clarifies that “The term ‘fish and wildlife’ means any member of the animal kingdom . . .”
(ii) to fulfill the international treaty obligations of the United States with respect to
fish and wildlife and their habitats
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-19
This purpose recognizes the role the Refuge plays in meeting several treaty obligations
related to conservation of the fish and polar bears that inhabit both Alaska and Canada, and
the migratory birds shared by many nations (Appendix F).
(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
ANILCA Title VIII provides a number of provisions to ensure that, consistent with other
Refuge purposes, rural residents can continue to use Refuge lands and resources to meet their
physical, economic, traditional and other needs (see Chapter 4, Section 4.4.4).
(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
This purpose recognizes that protection of water resources is central to conservation of fish
and wildlife and their encompassing ecological systems and processes. It establishes an
unquantified, but absolute, Federal reserved water right for surface waters and groundwater
in the Refuge.
1.4.2.2 Designated Wilderness
ANILCA Section 702 (3) designated eight million acres, most of the original Range, as
wilderness. Section 102 (13) of the act clarifies that the term wilderness has “the same
meaning as when used in the Wilderness Act.” Although ANILCA recognized the unique
conditions in Alaska and provided a number of exceptions to the Wilderness Act’s provisions,
the basic purposes of the Wilderness Act continue to apply. The Refuge’s designated
wilderness is to remain “an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled
by man.” The area is to remain natural and undeveloped, “retaining its primeval character and
influence,” and provide “opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of
recreation” (The Wilderness Act of 1964),
The purposes of the Wilderness Act are additional purposes of the designated wilderness
portion of the Refuge. The purposes of the Wilderness Act are to:
“Secure an enduring resource of wilderness; protect and preserve the wilderness
character of areas within the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS);
administer the NWPS for the use and enjoyment of the American people in a way that
will leave these areas unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness; and gather
and disseminate information regarding the use and enjoyment of wilderness areas.”
1.4.2.3 Wild Rivers
ANILCA Sections 602 (39)(42)(43) and 605(a) designated those portions of the Ivishak,
Sheenjek, and Wind Rivers within the boundaries of the Refuge as wild rivers pursuant to the
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-20 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.5 Special Values of Arctic Refuge
Section 304(g)(2)(B) of ANILCA requires that, prior to developing a Plan, the Secretary of the
Interior “shall identify and describe the special values of the refuge, as well as any other
archeological, cultural, ecological, historical, paleontological, scenic, or wilderness value of the
refuge.” To meet this requirement, the Service drew upon a variety of sources that reflect the
range of values the Refuge holds for the American public. These sources include: documents
related to the original and ANILCA Refuge purposes; comments received from the public
during previous planning processes; meetings with stakeholders; a review of media accounts of
the Refuge; two studies of Refuge visitors; a study examining national interest in the Refuge;
and scientific reports. The following special values summarize the most prominent Refuge
values that emerged from examination of these sources.
1.5.1 Wilderness Characteristics
Arctic Refuge exemplifies the idea of wilderness—to leave some remnants of this nation’s
natural heritage intact, wild, and free of the human intent to control, alter, or manipulate the
natural order. Embodying tangible and intangible values, the Refuge’s wilderness
characteristics include natural conditions, wild character, and exceptional opportunities for
solitude, adventure, and emersion in the natural world.
1.5.2 Ecological Values
The distinguishing ecological aspect of the Refuge—and a major reason for its
establishment—is that this single protected area encompasses a wide range of arctic and
subarctic ecosystems, their unaltered landforms, and native flora and fauna. The Refuge is a
place of free-functioning ecological and evolutionary processes, exhibiting a high degree of
biological integrity, natural diversity, and environmental health. Bordered by four
conservation units, the Refuge preserves the core of what is one of the world’s largest trans-boundary
protected areas.
1.5.3 Wildlife Values
The Refuge’s diverse fauna includes at least 48 species of mammals, including several high-profile
and special-status species: polar and grizzly bears, wolf, wolverine, Dall’s sheep, moose,
muskox, beluga whale, and two free-roaming caribou herds. Some species, like the Alaska
marmot, occur in few other places. At least 42 species of fish inhabit Refuge waters. More than
170 species of birds depend upon the Refuge for at least some portion of their lifecycles, their
migrations reaching remote corners of the earth. Of central importance is the ecological
context in which these species occur, with their natural behavior, interactions, cycles, and
ecological roles continuing.
1.5.4 Rivers
About 160 named rivers and streams, and several hundred lesser waterways, flow through
the Refuge. The large number of unmodified, free-flowing rivers is noteworthy. Three are
designated as wild—the Sheenjek, Wind, and Ivishak—but the Refuge ensures perpetuation
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-21
of the remote, undeveloped, primeval nature of all rivers within its boundaries. Some
tranquil, some tumultuous, their character is as varied as the spruce forests, ramparts,
canyons, gorges, and open tundra through which they flow. Ancient travel corridors for
wildlife and Native people, they also provide diverse opportunities for today’s seekers of
adventure, solitude, and escape.
1.5.5 Landscape Scale and Features
From its southern forests across the precipitous mountain divide to its coastal lagoons and
islands along the Beaufort Sea, this 19.3-million-acre Refuge—the size of South Carolina—
spans six major physiographic zones. Its vastness encompasses wetlands and lakes, warm
springs, aufeis fields, pingos, the highest peaks of the Brooks Range, active glaciers, broad
valleys, steep river canyons and ravines, waterfalls, fossil beds, caverns and sheer walls of
folded and faulted rock, mesas, pinnacles, and spires. They represent the unending variety of
this landscape’s physical features—many dramatically scenic, others quietly sublime, many
remaining nameless, some perhaps undiscovered.
1.5.6 Scientific Values
As intended, the Refuge has become a natural laboratory of international importance. The
ecological processes, natural diversity, and free function of natural communities in the Refuge
provide unsurpassed opportunities for scientific understanding of wildlife, ecology, geophysics,
and the changing climate. Numerous long-term investigations provide insights into the natural
world, both as it functions naturally and as it responds to large-scale, human-caused
influences, such as global climate change.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-22 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.5.7 Native Culture and Subsistence
Arctic Refuge encompasses the traditional homeland of Iñupiat and Gwich’in peoples and
perpetuates opportunities for their continuing traditional subsistence uses, skills, and
relationships with the land. Their contemporary use sites are often shared with millennia-old
archeological sites—part of the living link between the past and present. This land provides
opportunities for us all to understand and respect the diversity of human history, culture,
and lifeways.
1.5.8 Historic and Heritage Values
While the story of the Refuge’s establishment chronicles the emergence of an ecology-based
approach to landscape management and protection, it also reveals the nation’s desire to
perpetuate part of its cultural heritage. The Refuge represents deep-rooted American cultural
values about frontiers, open spaces, and wilderness. It is one of the finest representations of
the wilderness that helped shape our national character and identity and has always been part
of the American psyche.
1.5.9 Recreational Values
The Refuge is renowned for the opportunities it provides for adventure, exploration,
independence, and solitude. Whether visitors come to hunt, view, or photograph wildlife, for
the challenge of an arduous backpacking trek or river float, or just to enjoy the area’s stark
beauty from the comfort of a base camp, they can find themselves immersed in a world apart,
free from the distractions of modern civilization. The Refuge remains a place where a sense of
adventure, mystery, and discovery still prevails.
1.5.10 Hunting Values
Hunters played a critical role in establishing the original Range, advocating a place for the
adventurous pursuit of game “in the tradition of the highest form of the sport” (Murie 1956).
This setting rewards those seeking to challenge themselves under primitive conditions. The
Refuge’s remote expanses can test a hunter’s skill, fortitude, and self-reliance. It offers a
wilderness experience reminiscent of a bygone era.
1.5.11 A Symbolic Value
Since the first efforts to establish a “Last Great Wilderness,” most people who value this
landscape have been less interested in how it can be used than in what its continued
preservation represents. Millions who will never set foot in the Refuge find satisfaction,
inspiration, and even hope in just knowing it exists. The Refuge represents the hope of a past
generation that one of the finest remnants of our natural inheritance will be passed on,
undiminished, to future generations. For many people, the question of the Refuge’s future has
now come to symbolize daunting questions the nation faces regarding energy policy,
sustainability, and our effect upon the larger biosphere we jointly inhabit.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-23
1.6 Arctic Refuge Vision and Goals
1.6.1 Refuge Vision Statement
Arctic Refuge staff developed the following statement about their vision for the Refuge’s
future, drawing upon its purposes, special values, and the unique role it serves in the Refuge
System:
This untamed arctic landscape continues to sustain the ecological diversity and special
values that inspired the Refuge’s establishment. Natural processes continue and
traditional cultures thrive with the seasons and changing times; physical and mental
challenges test our bodies, minds and spirit; and we honor the land, the wildlife and the
native people with respect and restraint. Through responsible stewardship this vast
wilderness is passed on, undiminished, to future generations.
1.6.2 Refuge Goals
Goals are descriptive, open-ended, and often broad statements of desire for a refuge’s future.
They convey a purpose but do not define measurable units. Goals for Arctic Refuge are
directed towards carrying out the Refuge’s mandates and achieving its purposes. Goals are
derived from the Refuge’s purposes, special values, vision statement, and various other laws,
policies, and guidance. The Revised Plan, to be adopted as a result of this planning effort, must
work toward meeting all these goals:
Goal 1: Ecological processes shape the Refuge, and its management remains essentially free
of the intent to alter the natural order, including natural population densities and
dynamics, and levels of variation of native fish, wildlife, and plants.
Goal 2: The Refuge retains its exceptional wilderness values without loss of natural condition
and wild character, and manages designated wilderness consistent with the intent of
the Wilderness Act and ANILCA.
Goal 3: The Refuge’s designated wild rivers flow freely through unaltered corridors, their
ecological functions, character, and values are protected, and opportunities for
recreation and traditional uses are consistent with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
and ANILCA.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-24 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Goal 4: The Refuge provides continued subsistence opportunities to federally qualified rural
residents, consistent with ANILCA.
Goal 5: The Refuge provides a place for wildlife-dependent and wilderness-associated
recreational activities that emphasize adventure, independence, self-reliance,
exploration, and solitude while protecting the biological and physical environments.
Goal 6: The effects of climate change on Refuge resources are evaluated through scientific
research and monitoring, the sharing of traditional knowledge in local communities,
and are considered in Refuge management.
Goal 7: The Refuge and its partners conduct research and monitoring in support of the
Refuge’s role as an internationally recognized benchmark for naturally functioning
arctic and subarctic ecosystems.
Goal 8: The Refuge's cultural resources, historic and prehistoric, are conserved to allow
visitors and community members to appreciate the interconnectedness of the people
of the region and their environment.
Goal 9: The Refuge provides information to diverse audiences, near and far, to enhance their
understanding, appreciation, and stewardship of the Refuge and its resources, and
reflecting the nation’s interest in this place.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-25
1.7 Planning Requirements
Section 304(g) of ANILCA directs that comprehensive conservation plans be developed for
each refuge. It also specifies procedures for developing these plans. The following must be
identified and described prior to developing a plan for any refuge:
 The populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the refuge
 The special values of the refuge and any other archaeological, cultural, ecological,
geological, historical, paleontological, scenic, or wilderness values of the refuge
 Areas in the refuge suitable for use as administrative sites or visitor facilities, or for
visitor services, as provided for in ANILCA sections 1305 and 1306
 Present and potential future requirements for access with respect to the refuge, as
provided for in ANILCA Title XI
 Significant problems that may adversely affect the populations and habitats of fish and
wildlife
In addition to the stated requirements, plans must:
 Designate areas in the refuge according to their respective resources and values
 Specify the programs for conserving fish and wildlife and the programs related to
maintaining the special values of the refuge that are proposed in each area
 Specify the uses in each area that may be compatible with the major purposes of the
refuge
 Set forth those opportunities provided in the refuge for fish- and wildlife-oriented
recreation, ecological research, environmental education, and interpretation of refuge
resources and values, if such recreation, research, education, and interpretation is
compatible with purposes of the refuge.
During the planning process, the Service is required to ensure adequate interagency
coordination and public participation. Interested and affected parties such as State agencies,
Native entities, organizations, and local and national residents who may be affected by
decisions in the Plan must be provided meaningful opportunities to present their views. Prior
to adopting a plan, the Service will publish a notice of its availability in the Federal Register,
make copies available in regional offices of the Service throughout the United States, and
provide opportunities for public review and comment.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-26 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.8 The Planning Process
This section describes the process used to develop this draft Plan and Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS). The process is consistent with the planning requirements specified in
Section 304(g) of ANILCA; the Refuge System Administration Act, as amended by the
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act; the Service’s planning policy (602 FW 1
and 3); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347); and the Council on
Environmental Quality���s Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1500–1508). The Service used an eight-step
planning process to revise the Plan for Arctic Refuge (Figure 1-1):
1) Design the planning process (preplanning)
2) Initiate public involvement and scoping
3) Identify significant issues
4) Develop and analyze alternatives
5) Prepare draft Plan and EIS
6) Prepare and adopt a final Plan
7) Implement, monitor, and evaluate the Plan
8) Review and revise the final Plan as necessary
Figure 1-1. The Planning Process
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-27
1.8.1 Design the Process
During the fall of 2009, the Service began reviewing the 1988 Arctic Refuge Plan to determine
how it should be revised. The Service found that, in most cases, on-the-ground management
actions were meeting Refuge purposes and objectives. However, some management direction
needed to be updated. New laws, such as the Refuge System Improvement Act, new
regulations and policies, and other changes, such as Federal management of subsistence
harvests of fish and wildlife on Alaska refuges, needed to be included in the Plan.
The Service identified all relevant laws, regulations, policies, and other direction that would be
considered during revision of the Plan. These are discussed in the legal and planning context
sections earlier in this chapter (Section 1.3), and additional detail can be found in Appendix A.
The Service formed a planning team to review the available data on Refuge resources and
human uses and identified areas that require additional work.
1.8.2 Initiate Public Involvement and Scoping
This step informed people that the Plan revision process was beginning and that the Service
was soliciting ideas on what issues should be addressed in the Revised Plan. Formal scoping
began with publication of the Notice of Intent to revise the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and prepare an EIS, which was published in the Federal
Register on April 7, 2010 (Vol. 75 No. 66, pp. 17763-17765).
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-28 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
In April 2010, a planning update announcing the Plan revision and seeking comments was
mailed to more than 2,000 individuals; local businesses; local, State and Federal agencies; and
organizations nationwide. The planning update contained information about the Refuge, the
planning process, and some preliminary issues indentified by Refuge staff. The mailing
included a comment form so the public could make suggestions or identify other issues or
concerns that should be addressed during the revision of the Plan.
An Arctic Refuge planning website was developed during fall 2009 to keep the public informed
about planning efforts, involvement opportunities, and decisions. The website was periodically
updated with key documents and information about the Plan, including a link to the Notice of
Intent, press releases, the April 2010 planning update, and all posters and materials developed
for public meetings. The intent was to provide the same information to Internet users as to those
people attending meetings or receiving mailings. Through the website, the public could request
inclusion on the Plan mailing list or submit an electronic version of the April comment form.
Eight public open house meetings were held—five in communities adjacent to or within the
boundaries of Arctic Refuge; one in Washington, DC; one in Anchorage; and one in Fairbanks
(Table 1-1).
Table 1-1. Location, dates, and attendance of public meetings
Community Meeting Date Attendance
Fort Yukon April 20, 2010 59
Arctic Village April 26, 2010 32
Venetie April 29, 2010 56
Washington, DC May 4, 2010 44
Anchorage May 11, 2010 149
Fairbanks May 13, 2010 168
Kaktovik May 20, 2010 26
Barrow June 4, 2010 12
Attendance at these meetings ranged from 12 to 168 individuals. A total of 94,061 individuals
and organizations provided written and oral comments during the scoping process. An
independent contractor reviewed, coded, and analyzed the responses over a three-month
period during the summer of 2010. Appendix I summarizes the scoping comments.
1.8.3 Identify Significant Issues
The planning team reviewed the issues raised by the public, Refuge staff, other Service
divisions and Federal agencies, tribal governments, and the State to identify the significant
planning issues to be addressed in the Revised Plan. Significant issues are those the Refuge
can control and may be handled differently in each of the alternatives. Sections 1.9 and 1.10
further describe planning issues. Chapter 3 describes the identified significant planning issues
in detail.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-29
1.8.4 Develop and Analyze Alternatives
After the significant planning issues were identified in August 2010, the planning team met
and developed a set of six draft alternatives that would meet the Refuge’s purposes and goals
and comply with the Service and Refuge System missions. In April 2011, a planning update
was sent to interested individuals and to State, Federal, and local government agencies in the
affected area summarizing the draft alternatives and announcing the Plan’s availability for
public review and comment. Chapter 3 describes the six alternatives, and Chapter 5 provides
an analysis of the potential environmental, social, and economic impacts of each alternative.
1.8.5 Prepare Draft Plan and Environmental Impact Statement
The EIS describes six alternatives (including current management) for managing Arctic
Refuge during the next 15 years, or until the next Plan revision. It includes an analysis of the
potential impacts of implementing each alternative and a description of management actions
that are common to all alternatives. The Service will provide a 90-day public review and
comment period on the draft Plan and EIS. During the public review period, the Service will
host public meetings in the communities of Anchorage, Arctic Village, Fairbanks, Fort Yukon,
Kaktovik, and Venetie; and formal public hearings in Anchorage and Fairbanks.
1.8.6 Prepare and Adopt a Final Plan
The planning team will review and analyze all public comments received on the draft Revised
Plan and EIS. The draft will be modified as needed, including refining the alternatives and
selecting a preferred alternative, after which the Service will develop a Final Revised Plan and
EIS. Following a 30-day public review of the Final Revised Plan, the regional director will
issue a record of decision (ROD) that describes the alternative that will be implemented and
the rationale the regional director used to make the decision. The Service will publish a Notice
of Availability in the Federal Register and distribute the Final Revised Plan and ROD to
interested parties.
1.8.7 Implement Plan, Monitor, and Evaluate
After distributing the ROD and Final Revised Plan, Refuge staff will begin implementing any
management changes called for in the Plan (Chapter 6). Monitoring—measuring resource and
social conditions to ensure progress is being made toward meeting Refuge purposes, goals,
and objectives—is a critical component of management. Monitoring helps determine if
management actions are effectively meeting the objectives. The Refuge will use an adaptive
management approach in which information gained from monitoring will be used to evaluate
and, as needed, modify Refuge management actions.
1.8.8 Review and Revise Plan
Service policy directs Arctic Refuge staff to review the Revised Plan annually to assess any
need for change in management direction. The Refuge will revise the Plan when important
new information becomes available, when ecological conditions change, or when the need to do
so is identified during a review. If major changes are proposed, public meetings may be held,
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-30 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
and a new environmental analysis may be needed. The Service would consult with appropriate
State agencies, Native governments, and others during future revisions. Full review and
revision of the Plan is scheduled to occur every 15 years or more often, if deemed necessary.
Arctic Refuge staff will continue to inform and involve the public through the appropriate
means, mainly on our website and through community meetings, mailings, and email alerts.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1-31
1.9 Planning Issues
The Service defines an issue as any unsettled matter that requires a management decision,
such as an initiative, opportunity, resource management problem, threat to a refuge resource,
conflict in use, public concern, or presence of an undesirable resource condition. In December
2009, Refuge staff began identifying issues. The public identified additional issues at open
houses and hearings in villages and communities; through comment forms distributed with the
first planning update and available on the Refuge’s Plan website; and through visits with
village residents and community leaders. By August 2010, 37 issues had been identified for
consideration during revision of the Plan.
Some of the 37 identified issues have been, or could be, addressed through existing laws,
regulations, or policies. Others were best addressed in the Refuge’s goals and objectives (see
Chapter 2) and/or through step-down planning (see Chapter 6). Other issues were determined
to be outside the scope of the Plan. Those issues that remained were considered significant.
Significant issues are (1) issues in our jurisdiction to address, (2) issues for which we can
suggest different actions or alternatives, and/or (3) issues that will influence the ROD. These
issues were addressed through the development of the alternatives, presented in Chapter 3.
The Refuge’s role in identifying and analyzing significant issues is to consider objectively a
wide range of approaches that could be taken to address each issue.
1.10 Significant Planning Issues
Three planning issues were identified for consideration during revision of the Arctic Plan. The
Revised Plan provides Arctic Refuge the opportunity to address the planning issues in a
variety of ways (alternatives). The identified issues are discussed in detail in Chapter 3. The
environmental analysis presented in Chapter 5 discusses the effects of implementing each
alternative approach to the significant planning issues.
Literature Cited
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan REF-1
Literature Cited
Adamczewski, J.Z., W.M. Kerr, E.F. Lammerding, and P.F. Flood. 1994. Digestion of low
protein grass hay by muskoxen and cattle. Journal of Wildlife Management. 58:679-
685.
Adams, F.J., T.L. Tanner, and M.A. Nelson. 2005. Harvest and biological characteristics of the
subsistence fishery in Arctic Village, Alaska, 2001-2003. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Alaska Fisheries Data Series 2005-18, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development. Alaska
Community Database. .
Accessed 24 Feb 2011.
Alaska Department of Commerce, Division of Community and Regional Affairs. 2010. Alaska
Community Database. . Accessed 22 Feb 2010.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. 2005. Alaska subsistence fisheries 2003
annual report. ADF&G Division of Subsistence. Juneau, Alaska, USA.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. 2009. Wildlife Information Network
(WinfoNet). . Accessed 16 Dec 2009 – 4 Jan 2010.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. 1984. State of Alaska resource management
recommendation for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and surrounding area. Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. 2000. Subsistence in Alaska: A year 2000
update. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence, Juneau,
Alaska, USA.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. 2006. Our wealth maintained: a strategy for
conserving Alaska’s diverse wildlife and fish resources. Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Juneau. .
Accessed 26 April 2010.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. 2009. Catalog of waters important for
spawning, rearing or migration of anadromous fishes. Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Juneau, Alaska, USA.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. Data for Kaktovik 1985. Community
Subsistence Information System (CSIS). .
Accessed 24 Feb 2011.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. Data for Kaktovik 1986. Community
Subsistence Information System (CSIS). .
Accessed 24 Feb 2011.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game [ADF&G]. Data for Kaktovik 1992. Community
Subsistence Information System (CSIS). .
Accessed 24 Feb 2011.
Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development. 2010. Alaska Population
Projections 2007–2030. . Accessed 3 March 2010.
Literature Cited
REF-2 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Office of History and Archaeology. 2001. Alaska
heritage resources survey. Database located at the Office of History and Archaeology.
Alaska Department of Natural Resources. 2008. The barter or sale of handicrafts. Office of
Subsistence Management, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. 2010. Chalkyitsik: airport
improvements. Reference No: 40277. State of Alaska capital project summary. Juneau,
Alaska, USA.
Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. 1987. Physical environment of the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Unpublished report. Alaska Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys.
Alaska Federation of Natives. 2010. The right to subsist. Federal protection of subsistence in
Alaska. 
Alaska Shorebird Group [ASG]. 2008. Alaska shorebird conservation plan. Version II. Alaska
Shorebird Group, Anchorage, Alaska.
. Accessed 26 April 2010.
Alexander, H.L. 1987. Putu: a fluted point site in Alaska: publication No. 17. Department of
Archaeology, Simon Frazer University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
Alt, K.T. 1969. Taxonomy and ecology of the inconnu (Stenodus leucichthys nelma) in Alaska.
Biological Papers of the University of Alaska 12: 1-61.
Alt, K.T. 1974. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Job R-ll-C. Movements,
age and growth, spawning ecology, population dynamics, and utilization of sheefish in
the middle Yukon River and Norton Sound streams. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration,
Annual Report of Progress, Project F-9-6. Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
Juneau, Alaska, USA.
Alt, K.T. 1976. Sport Fish Investigations of Alaska: Inventory and cataloging of North Slope
waters. Alaska Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish, Annual Performance Report.
Project F-9-8, Vol. 17, G-I, Juneau (pages 129-150).
Alt, K.T. 1979. Contributions to the life history of the humpback whitefish in Alaska.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 108: 156-160.
Alt, K.T. 1980. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Alaska Department of
Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish, Annual Performance Report, 1980-1981,
Project F-9-12, Vol. 21, R-II, Juneau (pages 1-31).
American Ornithologists’ Union [AOU]. 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. 7th edition
and supplements. American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C., USA.
Amstrup, S.C., and C. Gardner. 1994. Polar bear maternity denning in the Beaufort Sea.
Journal of Wildlife Management. 58: 1-10.
Amstrup, S.C., G.M. Durner, T.L. McDonald, and W.R. Johnson. 2006. Estimating potential
effects of hypothetical oil spills on polar bears. U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science
Center, Anchorage. Final Report to U.S. Minerals Management Service. 57 pp.
Amstrup, S.C., I. Stirling, and J.W. Lentfer. 1986. Past and present status of polar bears in
Alaska. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14 (3):241-254
Literature Cited
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan REF-3
Amstrup, S.C. 2002. Polar bears. Pages 65 -70 in D.C. Douglas, P.E. Reynolds, and E.B.
Rhodes, editors. Arctic Refuge coastal plan terrestrial wildlife research summaries.
U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources, Division, Biological Science Report
USGS/BRD/BSR-2002-0001.
Amstrup, S.C., T.L. McDonald, and I. Stirling. 2001. Polar bears in the Beaufort Sea: a 30 year
mark-recapture case history. Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental
Statistics 2: 221-234.
Andersen, D. 1993. Trapping in Alaska and the European Economic Community import ban
on furs taken with leghold traps. Technical Paper No. 223. Alaska Department of Fish
and Game, Division of Subsistence. Juneau, Alaska, USA.
Andersen, D., and G. Jennings. 2001. The 2000 harvest of migratory birds in ten Upper Yukon
River communities, Alaska. Final Report No. 1 to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under
Cooperative Agreement No. 701801J252.
Andersen, D.B., C.L. Brown, R.J. Walker, and K. Elkin. 2004. Traditional ecological
knowledge and contemporary subsistence harvest of non-salmon fish in the Koyukuk
River drainage, Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence,
Technical Paper Number 282, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Anderson, C.G. 1999. Arctic fox Alopex lagopus. Pages 147-148 in D.E. Wilson and S. Ruff,
editors. 1999. The Smithsonian Book of North American Mammals. Smithsonian
Institution Press. Washington, D.C., USA.
Anderson, D.D. 1968. A Stone age campsite at the gateway to America. Scientific American
218(6): 24-33.
Anderson, D.D. 1970. Akmak: an early archaeological assemblage from Northwest Alaska.
Acta Arctica 16: 1-180.
Andrews, E.F. 1977. Report on the cultural resources of the Doyon Region, Central Alaska.
Volumes I and II. Cooperative Park Studies Unit, University of Alaska, Fairbanks.
Andriyashev, A.P. 1954. Fishes of the northern seas of the U.S.S.R. keys to the fauna of the
U.S.S.R. No. 53, 617p. Israel Program for Scientific Translations.
Anras, M.L.B., P.M. Cooley, R.A. Bodaly, L. Anras, and R.J.P. Fudge. 1999. Movement and
habitat use by lake whitefish in a boreal lake: Integrating acoustic telemetry and
geographic information systems. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 128:
939-952.
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment [ACIA]. 2005. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, United Kingdom. 1042 pp.
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. 2004. Impacts of a warming arctic: arctic climate impact
assessment. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1976. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1972. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1977. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1975. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1979. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1978. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Literature Cited
REF-4 Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Arctic Refuge. 1980. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1979. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1984. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1983. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1985. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1984. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1986. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1985. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1987. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1986. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1988. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1987. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1989. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1988. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1990. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Annual Narrative Report - 1989. Arctic
Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 1993. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Draft River Management Plan and
Environmental Assessment. Arctic Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 2008a. Use of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by Toolik Lake people: 1997-
2005. Arctic Refuge, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA. Unpublished.
Arctic Refuge. 2008b. Strategies for Minimizing Your Impacts.
. Accessed 1 Feb 2011.
Arctic Refuge. 2010. Summary of Recreational Impact Monitoring Efforts for the Kongakut
River, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Unpublished report. Arctic Refuge, Fairbanks,
Alaska, USA.
Arctic Refuge. 2011. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge public use summary. Arctic Refuge,
Fairbanks, Alaska, USA. . Accessed 1
Jan 2009 – 2 Feb 2010.
Arft, A.M., M.D. Walker, J. Gurevitch, J.M. Alatalo, M.S. Bret-Harte, M. Dale, M. Diemer,
M.F. Gugerli, G.H.R Henry, M.H. Jones, R.D. Hollister, L.S. IJónsdóttir, K. Laine, E.
Lévesque, G.M. Marion, U. Molau , P. Mølgaard,U. Nordenhäll, V. Raszhivin, C.H.
Robinson, G. Starr, A. Strenström, Ø. Totland, P.L. Turner, L.J. Walker, P.J. Webber,
J.M. Welker, and P.A. Wookey. 1999. Responses of tundra plants to experimental
warming: meta-analysis of the International Tundra Experiment. Ecological
Monographs 69: 491-511.
Armstrong, R.H. and J.E. Morrow. 1980. The Dolly Varden char, Salvelinus malma. Pages
99-140 in U.K. Balon, editor. Charrs: salmonid fishes of the genus Salvelinus. Dr. W.
Junk Publishers, The Hague, Netherlands.
Arthur, S.M. and P.A. Del Vecchio. 2009. Effects of oil field development on calf production
and survival in the Central Arctic Herd. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration. Final Research Technical Report. Grants W-27-5
and W-33-1 through W-33-4. Project 3.46. Juneau, Alaska, USA.
Literature Cited
Arctic Refuge Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan REF-5
Arthur, S.M., K.R. Whitten, F.J. Mauer, and D. Cooley. 2003. Modeling the decline of the
Porcupine caribou herd, 1989-1998: the importance of survival vs recruitment.
Rangifer Special Issue 14:123-130.
Arvey, W.D. 1991. Stock status of anadromous Dolly Varden in waters of Alaska’s North
Slope. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Fishery Manuscript Number 91-3.
Bacon, J.J., T.R Hepa., H.K Brower., M.Pederson, T.P. Olemaun, J.C. George, and B.G.
Corrigan. 2009. Estimates of subsistence harvest for villages on the North Slope of
Alaska, 1994-2003. North Slope Borough Department of Wildlife Management,
Barrow, Alaska, USA.
Balascio, N.L., D.S. Kaufman, J.P. Briner, and W.F. Manley. 2005a. Equilibrium-line altitudes
during the last glacial maximum across the Brooks Range, Alaska. Journal of
Quaternary Science 20:821-838.
Balascio, N.L., D.S. Kaufman, J.P. Briner, and W.F. Manley. 2005b. Late pleistocene glacial
geology of the Okpilak-Kongakut Rivers region, northeastern Brooks Range, Alaska.
Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research 37:416-424.
Ballard, W.B., E.H. Follmann, D.G. Ritterr, M.D. Robards, and M.A. Cronin. 2001. Rabies and
canine distemper in an arctic fox population in Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Diseases
37(1): 133-137.
Barber, V.A., G.P. Juday, T. Osterkamp, R. D'Arrigo, E. Berg, B. Buckley, L. Hinzman, H.
Huntington, M.T. Jorgenson, D. Mcguire, B. Riordan, A. Whiting, G. Wiles, and M.
Wilmking. 2009. A synthesis of recent climate warming effects on terrestrial
ecosystems of Alaska. Pages 110-139 in F.H. Wagner, editor. Climate Warming in
Western North America: Evidence and Environmental Effects. University of Utah
Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Barry, R.G. 1979. Study of Climatic Effects on Fast Ice Extent and Its Seasonal Decay Along
the Beaufort-Chukchi Coasts. Pages 272-375 in Environmental Assessment of the
Alaskan Continental Shelf, Vol. 2: Physical Science Studies, Final Report. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Bart, J., B. Andres, S. Brown, G. Donaldson, B. Harrington, V. Johnston, S. Jones, R.I.G.
Morris