Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2 ~ Appendices Kenai National Wildlife Refuge

              U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission Statement
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 Mission Statement
The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is to
administer a national network of lands and waters for the
conservation, management, and, where appropriate,
restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their
habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and
future generations of Americans.
—National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
The comprehensive conservation plan details program planning levels that are
substantially greater than current budget allocations and, as such, is for strategic
planning and program prioritization purposes only. This plan does not constitute a
commitment for staffing increases or funding for future refuge-specific land
acquisitions, construction projects, or operational and maintenance increases.
Cover photos from Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Image Library
Revised
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
and
Environmental Impact Statement
Volume 2 ~ Appendices
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge
August 2009
Prepared by:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Region 7
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge
2139 Ski Hill Road
P.O. Box 2139
Soldotna, Alaska 99669-2139
Alaska Regional Office
Division of Conservation Planning & Policy
1011 East Tudor Rd., MS-231
Anchorage, AK 99503
Thank you for participating in our planning process!
Your comments will help us prepare a better plan for the future of Kenai Refuge.
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Regional Office, National Wildlife Refuge System-Alaska
Division of Conservation Planning & Policy
1011 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
(907) 786-3357
Dear Reader:
This Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan (Plan) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge will guide management of the Refuge for the next 15 years.
This Plan revises the Refuge’s original comprehensive conservation plan completed in 1985. It outlines
five management alternatives, including our preferred alternative, addresses management issues
raised during public scoping, and presents our evaluation of the impacts associated with implementing
each alternative.
This Plan has been published in two volumes. Volume 1 contains the background, issues, and analysis.
Volume 2 contains the supporting appendices.
This Plan incorporates changes based on comments received on the Draft Plan. Those comments and
our responses are presented in Volume 2, Appendix D. Most comments required only that we clarify
or make minor corrections to the text. Others were more involved. For example, Objective 2.9 was re-written
to remove the population objectives for Dall sheep and mountain goats in response to concerns
expressed by the State of Alaska. Another change was to propose a change in regulations to allow the
Refuge Manager to grant special use permits, for airplane access to normally closed lakes, to
successful applicants in the State’s limited drawing hunt program.
Most people will be unaffected by changes in Refuge management. For example, there will be no
changes to how dog mushing activities can be performed on the Refuge.
Public involvement in the planning process is essential for development of an effective plan. While
there will be no formal public review of this final Plan and EIS, comments on the plan will be
considered until September 28, 2009. Comments should be specific, addressing merits of the
alternatives and adequacy of the analysis. We will consider these comments as we prepare the Record
of Decision. The Record of Decision will complete the comprehensive conservation planning process
for Kenai National Wildlife Refuge.
You may view the Plan or a Summary of the Plan online at:
http://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/planning/plans.htm or obtain a compact disk with both versions.
Comments and requests for copies of
the Plan, the Summary, or a compact
disk with both should be directed to:
Requests for further information about the
Refuge should be directed to:
Peter Wikoff, Planning Team Leader
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1011 E. Tudor Road, MS-231
Anchorage, AK 99503
Phone: (907) 786-3357
Email: fw7_kenai_planning@fws.gov
Refuge Manager
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge
2139 Ski Hill Road
P.O. Box 2139
Soldotna, Alaska 99669-2139
Phone: (907) 262-7021
Email: kenai@fws.gov
Table of Contents
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan v
Table of Contents ~ Volume 2
Title Page .............................................................................................................................................................. i
Dear Reader Letter ........................................................................................................................................... iii
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................ v
Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................... xvii
Appendices
A Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
B Coordination with the State of Alaska
C Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
D Comments Received and Our Response to Comments
E Easements and Right-of-Ways
F Species List
G Assessing River Values—Methodology and Results
H Preparers
I Mailing List
J Glossary
Tables
Table C-1. Activities, Public Uses, Commercial Uses, and Facilities by Management
Category .................................................................................................................................. C-46
Table E-1. State Claimed RS 2477 Routes within the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge .......................E-5
Table E-2. Active Right-of-Way Permits ...................................................................................................E-6
Table G-1. Attributes and Measurements Used To Conduct Outstandingly
Remarkable Value Assessment ............................................................................................... G-7
Table G-2. Kenai River Evaluation ............................................................................................................ G-8
Table G-3. Moose River Evaluation ........................................................................................................... G-9
Table G-4. Russian River Evaluation ....................................................................................................... G-10
Table G-5. Killey River Evaluation .......................................................................................................... G-11
Table G-6. Swanson River Value .............................................................................................................. G-12
Table G-7. Fox River Evaluation .............................................................................................................. G-13
Table G-8. Chickaloon River Evaluation ................................................................................................. G-14
Table G-9. Comparison of River Values Evaluation ............................................................................... G-15
Figures
Figure E-1. Easements and Indentifed RS-2477s ......................................................................................E-3
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan vii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADCED Alaska Department of Community and Economic
Development
ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish & Game
ADGGS Alaska Division of Geological and Geographical
Surveys
ADNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources
ADOT Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities
ADTPF Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities
AFS Alaska Fire Service
ALCES Alaska Landscape Cumulative Effects Simulator
ALMS Alaska Landbird Monitoring Survey
ANCSA Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
ANHA Alaska Natural History Association
ANILCA Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
AO authorized officer
AOGCC Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
AQRV air quality-related values
ATV all-terrain vehicle
AWFCG Alaska Wildland Fire Coordinating Group
BAER Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation
BBS Breeding Bird Survey
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BLM/AFS Bureau of Land Management Alaska Fire Service
Borough Kenai Peninsula Borough
BSE bovine spongiform encephalopathy
(mad cow disease)
CAFF Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna
Acronyms and Abbreviations
viii Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
CAP Contaminants Assessment Process
CBC Christmas Bird Count
CDC Center for Disease Control
CDV Canine Distemper Virus
CE categorical exclusion
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
cfs cubic feet per second
CIRI Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Flora and Fauna
CJD Creutzfelt-Jacob disease
Conservation Fund Land and Water Conservation Fund
CPV Canine Parvovirus
CWD chronic wasting disease
dB decibels
DDT dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
DEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
DEM Digital Elevation Model
DLP defense-of-life-or-property
DNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources
DOI Department of the Interior
E-SRS Project East Swanson River Satellite Natural Gas
Exploration and Development Project
e.g. exemplia gratia – for example
EA Environmental Assessment
EIN easement identification number
EIA environmental impact analysis
EIS environmental impact statement
EO executive order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan ix
Et al. et alia – and others
Etc. et cetera – and others, especially of the same kind
et seq et sequens – and the following one
F Fahrenheit
FIA Forest Inventory and Analysis
FIP feline infectious peritonitis
FMH Fire Monitoring Handbook
FMO Fire Management Officer
FPA Fire Program Analysis
FPV feline panleukopenia virus
FRCC Fire Regime/Condition Class
ft. foot/feet (per context)
FY fiscal year
GIS Geographic Information Systems
GMU game management unit
HCH hexachlorocyclohexane
HPS hantavirus pulmonary syndrome
I&M Plan Inventorying and Monitoring Plan
IACUC Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee
IBBST Interagency Brown Bear Study Team
i.e. id est – that is
IMPROVE Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments
Improvement Act National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act
of 1997
Inc. incorporated
IPM integrated pest management
ISER Institute for Social and Economic Research
(University of Alaska)
Acronyms and Abbreviations
x Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
IUP Incidental Use Permits
Kenai Refuge Kenai National Wildlife Refuge
KFWFO Kenai Fish and Wildlife Field Office
KP-CWMA Kenai Peninsula Cooperative Weed Management
Area
KRSMA Kenai River Special Management Area
LAC Limits-of-Acceptable-Change
LMRD Land Management Research Demonstration Site
LTEMP Long-Term Ecological Monitoring Program
mcf equals 1,000 cubic feet
MMPA Marine Mammal Protection Act
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MRA Minimum Requirements Analyses
MRC Kenai Moose Research Center
NAAQS National Atmospheric Air Quality Standards
NABCI North American Bird Conservation Initiative
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
No. number
NPS National Park Service
NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service
NWR National Wildlife Refuge
ORV off-road vehicle
Pad ES-A East Swanson Pad A
Pad ES-B East Swanson Pad B
PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan xi
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PDO Pacific Decadal Oscillation
Peninsula Kenai Peninsula
Plan Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Revised
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
PLO public land order
PM 2.5 particulate matter up to 2.5 microns in diameter
PSD prevention of significant deterioration
Range Kenai National Moose Range
RARE II Roadless Area Review and Evaluation
RAW Remote Automated Weather Station
Refuge Kenai National Wildlife Refuge
Refuge System National Wildlife Refuge System
Refuge System Administration Act National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act
(also as “Refuge Administration Act”)
Refuge System Improvement Act National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act
(also as “Refuge Improvement Act”)
RM river mile
RNA Research Natural Area
ROD Record of Decision
RONS Refuge Operational Needs System
RS-2477 Revised Statute 2477 (codified as U.S.C. 932); refers
to potential established rights-of-way for
construction of highways over public lands not
reserved for public use
SAMMS Service Asset Maintenance Management System
Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
SNAP Scenarios Network for Alaska Planning
SOA DOTPF State of Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities
System National Wildlife Refuge System
TFM Technical Fire Management
Acronyms and Abbreviations
xii Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
TPH total petroleum hydrocarbon
TSE transmissible spongiform encephalopathies
TUS Transportation and Utility Systems In and Across,
and Access Into, Conservation System Units
U.S.C. United States Code
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
USGS-BRD U.S. Geological Survey-Biological Resources
Division
WNV West Nile Virus
WRA wildlife recreation area
Appendix A:
Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
A-2 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan A-1
1. Legal Guidance and Planning
Coordination
1.1 Introduction
Management of Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge, Kenai Refuge) is
dictated, in large part, by the legislation that created the unit and the purposes
and goals described in Volume 1, Chapter 1. However, other laws, regulations,
and policies also guide the management of the Refuge. This Appendix
identifies the acts and policy guidance that are integral in the development of
this Comprehensive Conservation Plan (Plan).
1.2 Legal Guidance
Operation and management of the Refuge is influenced by a wide array of
Federal laws, treaties, and executive orders. Among the most important are
the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, as amended by the
National Wildlife System Improvement Act; the Refuge Recreation Act; the
Endangered Species Act; and the Wilderness Act. These acts are described
briefly, along with other acts and legal guidance that influence management
of the Kenai Refuge.
1.2.1 International Treaties
Several treaties affect how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
manages Kenai Refuge. Among these are migratory bird treaties with
Canada, Mexico, Japan, and Russia; and the Convention on Nature
Protection and Wildlife Conservation in the Western Hemisphere. These
treaties differ in emphasis and species of primary concern but collectively
provide clear mandates for identifying and protecting important habitats and
ecosystems and for protecting and managing individual species.
Treaties for migratory bird protection include management provisions such
as (1) prohibiting disturbance of nesting colonies; (2) allowing the Secretary
of the Interior to establish seasons for the taking of birds and the collection of
their eggs by “indigenous inhabitants” of Alaska for their own nutritional and
other essential needs; (3) directing each nation to undertake, to the maximum
extent possible, measures necessary to protect and enhance migratory bird
environments and to prevent and abate pollution or detrimental alternation of
their habitats; and (4) providing that protective measures under the treaty
may be applied to species and subspecies not listed in the specific
convention, but which belong to one of the families containing listed species.
Of the migratory bird species of concern in the treaties, those that use Kenai
Refuge include several Species of Concern identified by the State of
Alaska: American peregrine falcon, Steller’s eider, olive-sided flycatcher,
gray-cheeked thrush, Townsend’s warbler, and blackpoll warbler. Of 192
bird species that have been recorded on or adjacent to the Refuge, 113 are
known to breed in the area, and the majority are migratory.
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
A-2 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
warbler. Of 192 bird species that have been recorded on or adjacent
to the Refuge, 113 are known to breed in the area, and the majority
are migratory.
1.2.2 National Guidance
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 as amended,
16 U.S.C. 140hh–3233, 43 U.S.C. 1602–1784
ANILCA–In addition to amending the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act, the Alaska Statehood Act, and the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act, and modifying portions of the Wilderness Act as it applies
to Alaska lands, ANILCA expanded the Federal conservation system in
Alaska (including national parks, refuges, forests, Wilderness areas,
and Wild and Scenic Rivers. Specifically, title III of ANILCA
established new refuges, identified the purposes of each refuge, and
provided administrative guidance for management of refuges in Alaska,
including requiring the preparation and periodic updating of a
comprehensive conservation plan for each refuge.
In addition, ANILCA provided comprehensive management guidance
for all Federal public lands in Alaska, including provisions regarding
Wilderness; subsistence; transportation and utility corridors; oil and
gas leasing; mining; public access; and hunting, fishing, and trapping.
No Wild and Scenic Rivers were designated on Kenai Refuge by
ANILCA. Section 1317 required that all Refuge lands not designated
as Wilderness be reviewed for their suitability for Wilderness
designation, in accordance with the provisions of the Wilderness Act.
The 1988 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the
Wilderness Proposal of the Final Kenai Comprehensive Conservation
Plan recommended, under Section 1317, 195,500 acres of Refuge land
for designation as Wilderness. That recommendation remains in effect.
Section 1317(c) provides that a recommendation of proposal for
Wilderness designation does not affect the normal administration and
management of the affected areas of the Refuge.
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 as amended, 43 U.S.C.
1601–1624
The purpose of this act was to provide for “…settlement of all claims by
Natives and Native groups of Alaska, based on aboriginal land claims.”
It provided for grants of land and money and the establishment of
Native corporations to maintain the economic affairs of Native
organizations. In exchange, all aboriginal titles and claims, including
any fishing and hunting rights, were extinguished. Section 12(a) allowed
village corporations to select lands, with several stipulations, in national
wildlife refuges. Section 22(g), however, stated that these lands were to
“…remain subject to the laws and regulations governing use and
development of such refuge.” Other refuge lands were selected under
Section 14(h)(1), which allowed regional corporations to select cemetery
sites and historical places. Section 17(b) provided for public easement
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan A-3
across Native lands for access to Federal lands. Section 17(d)(2)(A)
provided the basis for the enactment of ANILCA.
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
This act was passed in recognition of the increasing and conflicting uses
that were causing irreparable harm to the biological and physical
systems associated with coastal areas. The act directed states to
complete comprehensive coastal management programs. It mandated
that once a state’s plan received Federal approval, Federal actions
(which include this Comprehensive Conservation Plan) must be
consistent with the state’s plan.
Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1231–1544
The Endangered Species Act provides for the conservation of
threatened and endangered species of fish, wildlife, plants, and their
critical habitats by Federal action and by encouraging the
establishment of State programs. Although not specifically addressing
the National Wildlife Refuge System (System), it does directly affect
management activities on national wildlife refuges. It directs Federal
agencies to take actions that would further the purposes of the act and
to ensure that actions they carry out, authorize, or fund do not
jeopardize endangered species or their critical habitat (section 7).
Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, as amended by the Clean
Water Act of 1977, 33 U.S.C. s/s 1251 et seq.
This act regulates the discharge of pollutants into waters of the United
States. The act protects fish and wildlife, establishes operation permits
for all major sources of water pollution, limits the discharge of
pollutants or toxins into water, and makes it unlawful for any person to
discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters
unless a permit is obtained under the Clean Water Act.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as amended, 42 U.S.C.
4321–4347 (NEPA)
This act and the implementing regulations developed by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1500–1508) require Federal agencies
to integrate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process
with other planning at the earliest possible time to provide a systematic
interdisciplinary approach to decision making; to identify and analyze
the environmental effects of their actions; to describe appropriate
alternatives to the proposed actions; and to involve the affected State
and Federal agencies, tribal governments, and public in the planning
and decision making process.
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
A-4 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 as
amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997, 16 U.S.C. 668dd–668ee
This act establishes a unifying mission for the National Wildlife Refuge
System, a mission that—first and foremost—focuses on the
conservation of fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats. It requires the
preparation of a comprehensive conservation plan for each unit of the
System. Furthermore, it reinforces and expands the “compatibility
standard” of the Refuge Recreation Act, which requires that public
uses must be determined to be compatible with refuge and agency
missions and purposes before they can be allowed and establishes a
process for determining compatibility. The act also identifies six
priority wildlife-dependent recreation uses, clarifies the authority of the
Secretary of the Interior to accept donations of money for land
acquisition, and places restrictions on the transfer, exchange, or other
disposal of lands within the System.
The Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 as amended, 16 U.S.C. 460k–460k-4
This act requires that any recreation use on areas of the System be
“compatible” with the primary purpose(s) for which the area was
acquired or established. It also requires that sufficient funding be
available for the development, operation, and maintenance of recreation
uses that are not directly related to the area’s primary purpose(s).
The Wilderness Act of 1964, 16 U.S.C 1131–1136
This act (P.L. 88-577) defined the Wilderness resource and established
the National Wilderness Preservation System. It provides the
framework for designation by Congress of new units to the National
Wilderness Preservation System and prescribes for their management.
The Wilderness review required by Section 1317 of ANILCA and
included in the 1988 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
for the Wilderness Proposal of the Final Kenai Comprehensive
Conservation Plan was undertaken following the framework and
guidance provided by the Wilderness Act. The recommendation for
Wilderness designation included in the Record of Decision (ROD) for
the 1988 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is a
preliminary administrative determination that is conducted prior to
being forwarded to Congress for final action. Kenai Refuge currently
has 1,319,500 acres of designated Wilderness.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, 16 U.S.C. 1271–1287
This act establishes a National Wild and Scenic Rivers System and
prescribes the methods and standards through which additional rivers
may be identified and added to the system. Section 5(d)(1) requires that
in all planning by Federal agencies for the use and development of
water and related land resources, consideration be given to potential
wild, scenic, and recreation rivers. Rivers are added to the national
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan A-5
system based on their free-flowing character and their outstandingly
remarkable scenic, recreation, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic,
cultural, ecological, or other values. Rivers in the system are managed
to maintain and protect these outstandingly remarkable values for
present and future generations. For Wild and Scenic Rivers in Alaska,
ANILCA also provided direction for management of designated rivers.
No Wild and Scenic Rivers have been designated on Kenai Refuge,
though 17.3 miles of the Russian River designated as part of the
national system has been recommended by the U.S. Forest Service
(USDA 2002).
Other Laws
Laws that affect mineral leasing, recreation use, commercial fishing,
preservation and protection of cultural and historic resources, and
other activities on Federal lands are also considered in the
comprehensive conservation planning process.
1.3 Planning Coordination
Nature is not constrained by government boundaries that are used to
determine ownership or management of specific areas of land. Without
physical barriers and with available habitat, fish and wildlife will freely
roam through lands and waters regardless of ownership or
management. To ensure the conservation of the many species that
migrate across legal and political boundaries, a number of efforts—at
scales ranging from local community and regional plans to national and
international conservation programs—have been designed to monitor
and protect these species. These lands were reviewed during the
revision of the Kenai Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan to
ensure that the revised management direction is consistent with these
national conservation plans. The following list is not intended to be
comprehensive but demonstrates the range of documents reviewed.
When applicable, specific information from these plans has been
incorporated into this document.
North American Waterbird Conservation Plan for the Americas (2002)
This plan provides a continental-scale framework for the conservation
and management of 210 species of waterbirds, including seabirds,
coastal waterbirds, wading birds, and marshbirds utilizing aquatic
habitats in 29 nations throughout North America, Central America, the
islands and pelagic waters of the Caribbean Sea and western Atlantic,
the U.S.-associated Pacific Islands, and pelagic waters of the Pacific.
North American Waterfowl Management Plan
This conservation plan seeks to restore waterfowl populations in
Canada, the United States, and Mexico to levels recorded in the 1970s.
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
A-6 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
The international partnership has worked to identify priority habitats
for waterfowl and has established goals and objectives for waterfowl
populations and habitats (USFWS 1998). The Chickaloon Flats portion
of the Refuge provides breeding and migration habitat for a variety of
waterfowl, including whistling and trumpeter swans, lesser and
cackling Canada geese, white-fronted geese, snow geese, sandhill
cranes, northern pintail, mallard, green-winged teal, and other dabbling
ducks. Up to 5,000 lesser Canada geese at a time may use the
Chickaloon estuary in late September and early October on their
southward migration. Sixteen species of waterfowl are known to breed
on the Refuge, including trumpeter swan, Canada goose, green-winged
teal, mallard northern pintail, northern shoveler, American widgeon,
ring-necked duck, greater scaup, harlequin duck, surf scoter, white-winged
scoter, common goldeneye, Barrow’s goldeneye, common
merganser, and red-breasted merganser.
Partners in Flight
Partners in Flight is a cooperative effort involving partnerships among
Federal, State, and local government agencies; philanthropic
foundations; professional organizations; conservation groups; industry;
the academic community; and private individuals. Partners in Flight
was created in 1990 in response to growing concerns about declines in
the populations of many land bird species and to emphasize the
conservation of birds not covered by existing conservation initiatives.
Bird conservation plans, including the Landbird Conservation Plan for
Alaska Biogeograhic Regions (Boreal Partners in Flight Working
Group 1999), are developed in each region to identify species and
habitats most in need of conservation, to establish objectives and
strategies to provide needed conservation activities, and to implement
and monitor progress on the plans.
U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (Brown et al 2000)
This conservation plan seeks to stabilize populations of all shorebirds
that are in decline because of factors affecting habitat in the United
States. At a regional level, the plan’s goal is to ensure that shorebird
habitat is available in adequate quantity and quality to support
shorebird populations in each region. Ultimately, the goal of the
shorebird Conservation Plan is to restore and maintain shorebird
populations throughout the western hemisphere through an
international partnership. Twenty-four shorebird species have been
recorded on the Refuge: greater yellowlegs, lesser yellowlegs, sandhill
cranes, least sandpipers, spotted sandpipers, solitary sandpipers,
Baird’s sandpipers, pectoral sandpipers, semipalmated sandpipers,
western sandpipers, semipalmated plovers, black-bellied plovers,
American plovers, pacific golden-plovers, Wilson’s snipe, ruddy
turnstones, black turnstones, sanderlings, surfbird, whimbrel,
wandering tattler, Hudsonian godwit, short-billed dowitcher, and red-necked
phalarope.
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan A-7
1.3.1 Regional Management Plans
In addition to the national conservation plans, the Kenai Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan must consider the conservation
plans and management goals of neighboring lands of the region.
Regional plans, as well as goals and objectives from other programs,
were reviewed to understand how Kenai Refuge can contribute to the
goals for conservation within the State or local region. This list is not
intended to be comprehensive, but demonstrates some of the major
regional plans that were reviewed during the development of this draft.
When applicable, specific information from these plans has been
incorporated into this Plan.
Kenai Area Plan (DNR 2000)
This plan determines management intent, land use designations, and
management guidelines that apply to all State lands on the Kenai
Peninsula. The plan provides goals and specific guidelines that apply to
State land and waters.
Kenai Peninsula Borough Coastal Management Plan (Kenai
Peninsula Borough 2007)
This amended plan describes goals and objectives for resources within
the coastal zone. The focus of the plan is to maintain the functions and
values of coastal resources, including its socioeconomic values. The
objectives of the plan were reviewed to look for opportunities to make
progress on mutual goals.
Kenai Peninsula Borough Comprehensive Plan (Kenai Peninsula
Borough 2005)
This plan outlines basic functions, authorities, and responsibilities of the
Borough. It describes existing and expected future conditions; identifies
important issues; and provides a basis for policy decisions through the
development of goals, objectives, and implementation actions.
Kenai Peninsula Brown Bear Conservation Strategy (ADF&G 2000)
In November 1998, Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
identified the Kenai Peninsula population of brown bears as a
“Species of Special Concern.” This administrative designation was a
proactive measure designed to focus attention and research efforts
on Kenai Peninsula brown bears, an isolated population in an area
experiencing steady human population growth and increased human
activity. This Conservation Strategy identifies the policies and
management actions that help ensure the future of brown bears and
their habitat on the Kenai Peninsula and avoid restrictive actions
such as the listing of Kenai Peninsula brown bears under the
Federal Endangered Species Act.
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
A-8 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Kenai Peninsula Caribou Management Plan (ADF&G 2003)
This plan establishes goals, objectives, and criteria to maintain viable
and healthy herds of caribou on the Kenai Peninsula, with special
emphasis placed on suitable but unoccupied habitats in the Caribou
Hills and alpine tundra south of Fox River.
Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan (DNR 1997)
This plan provides a basis for management of State land and waters
within the Kenai River Special Management Area (KRSMA), including
the Kenai River, its tributaries, and those areas and habitats either
having a hydrological connection to the Kenai River or those significant
in terms of wildlife and fishery. It identifies management issues and
provides management recommendations for the entire watershed and
individual reaches of the river.
Upper Kenai River Interagency Cooperative Plan (DNR 1997)
This plan is a product of a joint effort of Federal and State agencies,
the Kenai Peninsula Borough, Cook Inlet Region, Inc., local
residents, and others interested in the future of the upper Kenai
River corridor. The plan addresses the public lands and waters
within one-quarter mile of the Kenai and Russian rivers between
Kenai, Lower Russian, and Skilak Lakes, and was developed using
the Limits-of-Acceptable-Change process. The purpose of the plan is
to guide future actions of the managing agencies as they strive for
collective vision for the river corridor.
1.4 References
ADF&G. 2000. “Kenai Peninsula Brown Bear Conservation
Strategy.” Anchorage, Alaska: Alaska
Department of Fish & Game, Division of Wildlife
Conservation. 84 pp.
ADF&G, USFS, USFWS. 2003. “Kenai Peninsula Caribou
Management Plan.” Soldotna, Alaska: Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Division of
Wildlife Conservation, USDA Forest Service,
Chugach National Forest, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. 36 pp.
Boreal Partners In Flight Working Group. 1999. “Landbird
conservation plan for Alaska biogeographic
regions.” Version 1.0; unpublished report.
Anchorage, Alaska: U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Appendix A: Legal Guidance and Planning Coordination
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan A-9
Brown, S., C. Hickey, and B. Harrington, eds. 2000. The U.S.
shorebird conservation plan. Manomet,
Massachusetts: Manomet Center for
Conservation Sciences.
DNR. 1997. “Kenai River Comprehensive Management Plan.”
Anchorage, Alaska: Alaska Department of
Natural Resources, Division of Land, Division of
Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Division,
Kenai Peninsula Borough.
DNR, ADF&G, USFS, USFWS. 1997. “Upper Kenai River
Interagency Cooperative Plan.” Soldotna,
Alaska: Department of Natural Resources,
Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Sport
Fish Division, USDA Forest Service, Chugach
National Forest, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. 8 pp.
DNR. 2000. “Kenai Area Plan.” Anchorage, Alaska: Alaska
Department of Natural Resources, Division of
Mining, Land & Water, Resource Assessment &
Development Section.
Kenai Peninsula Borough. 2007. “Kenai Peninsula Borough
Coastal Management Plan, Final Plan
Amendment” Soldotna, Alaska: Kenai Peninsula
Borough Resource Planning Department.
Kenai Peninsula Borough. 2005. “Kenai Peninsula Borough
Comprehensive Plan.” Accessed June 30, 2005.
At
http://www.kpbcompplan.com/index.html#Welco
me on the World Wide Web, produced by Kenai
Peninsula Borough, Soldotna, Alaska.
Kushlan, JA, MJ Steinkamp, KC Parsons, et al. 2002. Waterbird
Conservation for the Americas: The North
American Waterbird Conservation Plan, Version
1. Waterbird Conservation for the Americas,
Washington DC, U.S.A., 78 pp. (accessed 5/3/06)
USDA Forest Service. 2002. Revised Land and Resource
Management Plan, Final Environment Impact
Statement. Anchorage, AK.
USFWS. 1998. “Expanding the Vision: 1998 Update, North
American Waterfowl Management Plan.”
Appendix B:
Coordination with the State of Alaska
Appendix B: Coordination with the State of Alaska
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan B-1
1. Coordination with the State of Alaska,
Including the Master Memorandum of
Understanding with the Department of Fish
and Game
1.1 Introduction
Consistent with the principles of ecosystem management and the laws and
policies described in Volume 2, Appendix A, effective management of the
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) must be done in close coordination
with the State of Alaska. This appendix is not intended to be a
comprehensive list of state agencies, but rather to describe the primary state
agencies that share concern and responsibilities for fish, wildlife, and other
natural resources.
1.2 Alaska Department of Fish and Game
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has the primary
responsibility for managing fish and resident wildlife populations. On refuge
lands, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and ADF&G share a
mutual concern for all fish and wildlife resources and their habitats, and both
are engaged in extensive fish and wildlife conservation, management, and
protection programs. In 1982, the Service and ADF&G signed a Master
Memorandum of Understanding (dated March 13, 1982) that defines the
cooperative management roles of each agency (Volume 2, Appendix B,
section 1.2.1). This memorandum sets the framework for cooperation
between the two agencies.
Through the direction of the Boards of Fisheries and Game, the State of
Alaska establishes fishing, hunting, and trapping regulations throughout the
state. These regulations apply to federal public lands unless superseded by
federal subsistence regulations. The state is divided into 26 game
management units (GMUs); most of these are further divided into subunits.
State management objectives are developed for wildlife populations within
the GMUs. All Kenai Refuge lands lie within GMU 15. Management
objectives for wildlife and fish populations on the Refuge are discussed in
Volume 1, Chapter 2.
The state process for developing regulations involves substantial public input
to the Alaska Boards of Fisheries and Game concerning changes in
regulations and allocations. Input may be directly to the boards through
testimony and proposals or indirectly through participation in local fish and
game advisory committees. The advisory committees assist the boards in
assessing local fish and wildlife issues and proposed regulations. Biological
staff from ADF&G also provides data and analysis of proposals to the
boards. Regulations may be changes by the boards at regular meetings, by
emergency regulations, or by emergency order.
Appendix B: Coordination with the State of Alaska
B-2 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
regulations. Biological staff from ADF&G also provides data and
analysis of proposals to the boards. Regulations may be changes by the
boards at regular meetings, by emergency regulations, or by
emergency order.
Although many biologists within ADF&G have law enforcement
authority, most enforcement of fishing and hunting regulations is
carried out by Refuge law enforcement officers and officers of the
Alaska Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Wildlife Enforcement.
ADF&G’s Division of Wildlife Conservation works to conserve and
enhance Alaska’s wildlife and to provide for a wide range of uses for the
greatest benefit of current and future generations of people through
management of wildlife populations and habitat, research, information
transfer, regulatory activities, and public service. Wildlife Conservation
is responsible for overseeing development of management plans for a
variety of wildlife populations throughout the state.
ADF&G’s Division of Sport Fish is responsible for the state’s
recreational fishery resources: the conservation of self-perpetuating
populations of fish; management of sport fisheries in both salt and fresh
water; and hatchery production and release of fish for recreational
fishing. The goals of the division are to conserve naturally reproducing
populations of sport fish species, provide a diverse mix of recreational
fishing opportunities, and optimize the social and economic benefits of
Alaska’s recreational fisheries.
ADF&G’s Division of Subsistence is the research branch of the
department responsible for providing comprehensive information on
the customary and traditional use of wild resources. Information is
provided to meet management goals, aid in regulation development,
facilitate collaborative agreements, assess environmental impacts, and
describe the unique role of wild resources in Alaska.
1.2.1 Master Memorandum of Understanding Between the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
This Master Memorandum of Understanding between the State of
Alaska, Department of Fish and Game, hereinafter referred to as the
Department, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, hereinafter
referred to as the Service, reflects the general policy guidelines within
which the two agencies agree to operate.
WHEREAS, the Department, under the Constitution, laws, and
regulations of the State of Alaska), is responsible for the management,
protection, maintenance, enhancement, rehabilitation, and extension of
the fish and wildlife resources of the State on the sustained-yield
principle, subject to preferences among beneficial uses; and
WHEREAS, the Service, by authority of the Constitution, laws of
Congress, and regulations of the U.S. Department of Interior, has a
Appendix B: Coordination with the State of Alaska
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan B-3
mandated management responsibility for certain species or classes of
wildlife, and is responsible for the management of Service lands in
Alaska, and the conservation of fish and wildlife resources on these
lands; and
WHEREAS, the Department and the Service share a mutual concern
for fish and wildlife resources and their habitats and both are engaged
in extensive fish and wildlife conservation, management, and protection
programs and desire to develop and maintain a cooperative
relationship, which will be in the best interests of both parties, the
concerned fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, and produce
the greatest public benefit; and
WHEREAS, it has been recognized in the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act and subsequent implementing Federal
regulations that the resources and use of Service lands in Alaska are
substantially different than those of other states; and
WHEREAS, the Department and the Service recognize the increasing
need to coordinate resource planning and policy development;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:
THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME AGREES:
1. To recognize the Service as the agency with the responsibility to
manage migratory birds, endangered species, and other species
mandated by Federal law, and on Service lands in Alaska to conserve
fish and wildlife and their habitats and regulate human use.
2. To manage fish and resident wildlife populations in their natural
species diversity on Service lands.
3. To consult with the Regional Director in a timely manner and comply
with applicable Federal laws and regulations before embarking on
enhancement or construction activities on Service lands.
THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AGREES:
1. To recognize the Department as the agency with the primary
responsibility to manage fish and resident wildlife within the State of
Alaska.
2. To recognize the right of the Department to enter onto Service
lands at any time to conduct routine management activities which do
not involve construction, disturbance to the land, or alterations of
ecosystems.
3. To cooperate with the Department in planning for enhancement or
development activities on Service lands which require permits,
Appendix B: Coordination with the State of Alaska
B-4 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
environmental assessments, compatibility assessments, or similar
regulatory documents by responding to the Department in a timely
manner with requirements, timetables, and any other necessary input.
4. To manage the fish and wildlife habitat on Service lands so as to
ensure conservation of fish and wildlife populations and their habitats in
their natural diversity.
5. To consider carefully the impact of any proposed treaties or
international agreements relating to fish and wildlife resources on the
State of Alaska which could diminish the jurisdictional authority of’ the
State and to consult freely with the State when these treaties or
agreements have a primary impact on the State.
6. To review present U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service policies and any
future proposed changes in those policies in consultation with the
Department to determine if modified or special policies are needed for
Alaska.
7. To adopt refuge management plans whose provisions—including
provision for animal damage control—are in substantial agreement
with the Department’s fish and wildlife management plans, unless such
plans are determined formally to be incompatible with the purposes for
which the respective refuges were established.
8. To utilize the State’s regulatory process to maximum extent allowed
by Federal law in developing new or modifying existing Federal
regulations or proposing changes in existing State regulations
governing or affecting the taking of fish and wildlife on Service lands in
Alaska.
THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME AND THE FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE MUTUALLY AGREE:
1. To coordinate planning for management of fish and wildlife
resources on Service lands so that conflicts arising from differing legal
mandates, objectives, and policies either do not arise or are minimized.
2. To consult with each other when developing policy and legislation
which affect the attainment of wildlife resource management goals and
objectives or management plans.
3. To recognize that the taking of fish and wildlife by hunting,
trapping, or fishing on Service lands in Alaska is authorized in
accordance with applicable State and Federal law unless State
regulations are found to be incompatible with documented Refuge
goals, objectives, or management plans.
4. To develop such supplemental memoranda of understanding
between the Commissioner and the Regional Director as may be
required to implement the policies contained herein.
Appendix B: Coordination with the State of Alaska
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan B-5
5. That this Master Memorandum of Understanding shall become
effective when signed by the Commissioner of the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game and the Alaska Regional Director of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and shall continue in force until terminated by
either party by providing notice in writing 120 days in advance of the
intended date of termination.
6. That amendments to this Master Memorandum of Understanding
may be proposed by either party and shall become effective upon
approval by both parties.
STATE OF ALASKA U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Department of Fish and Game Fish and Wildlife Service
/signed/ Ronald O. Skoog /signed/ Keith M. Schreiner
Commissioner Regional Director, Alaska
March 13, 1982 March 13, 1982
Date Date
Appendix B: Coordination with the State of Alaska
B-6 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.3 Alaska Department of Natural Resources
The Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and its divisions
are also key management partners, coordinating with the Service and
other federal and state agencies in managing public lands (federal and
state) in Alaska. DNR manages all state-owned lands, water, and
surface and subsurface resources except for fish and game. DNR’s
Division of Mining, Land and Water mangers the state’s water and land
interests within national wildlife refuges. These interests will become
increasingly significant in the next 10 to 15 years, especially in regard
to water rights, navigable waters, ownership of submerged lands, and
rights-of-way over Refuge lands.
1.4 Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC)
The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) and
its divisions are also key management partners, coordinating with the
Service and other Federal and State agencies in managing the cleanup
and remediation of contaminated sites and/or spill events within the
Refuge’s oil and gas units. ADEC also issues air quality permits to
industry for equipment used in the oil and gas units. The ADEC
cleanup standards are usually used for contaminated soil and
groundwater cleanup and remediation if Service standards have not
been established.
Appendix C:
Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-3
1. Management Direction, Policies, and
Guidelines
1.1 Introduction
This appendix presents an overview of the management direction for
national wildlife refuges in Alaska, and includes management direction
specific to Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Kenai Refuge, Refuge). The
primary sources of this management direction are the laws governing
the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) and the
regulations, policies, and other guidance, both national and regional,
developed to implement these laws. Although each refuge is unique, it is
only one piece of this system. The management direction presented
here represents the common base for management of the Alaska
refuges and identifies appropriate sideboards for management of
individual refuges such as Kenai Refuge.
Refuge-specific deviations from these region-wide management policies
and guidelines are clearly identified along with supporting rationale.
This appendix contains the following:
 Descriptions of the management categories and their associated
general management intent
 Policies and guidelines specific to each category
 A table that displays activities, public uses, commercial uses, and
facilities by management category
Under all action alternatives (Alternatives B–E), management of the
Refuge would comply with the management direction described in this
section. As a result, the alternatives share a set of common
management policies and guidelines. These directions provide a
common base on which each of the alternatives is built and represents
the typical level of management necessary to comply with existing law,
regulation, and policy.
The management category descriptions are not the same as those from
the previous (1980s) round of Comprehensive Conservation Plans,
which evolved over the course of the planning process. These
management category descriptions will remain constant for all the
plans unless a well-justified exception is warranted as described above.
If there is any conflict between the existing Refuge plan and these
management guidelines, before a final revised Comprehensive
Conservation Plan (Plan) is adopted for the Refuge, the direction in the
existing Plan will take precedence over that contained in these
guidelines (unless the conflict is the result of changes in law, judicial
rulings, or other non-discretionary guidance).
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-4 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.2 Management Categories
Although five management categories, ranging from Intensive
management to designated Wilderness, are used to describe
management levels throughout refuges in Alaska, four categories—
Wilderness, Minimal, Moderate, and Intensive—would be used to
describe management on Kenai Refuge under the preferred alternative.
Under the preferred alternative and at the end of the life of the Alaska
pipeline project, Moderate management lands would convert to
Minimal management and only three management categories—
Wilderness, Minimal, and Intensive Management—would be used to
describe management levels on the Refuge.
A management category is used to define the level of human activity
appropriate to a specific area of the Refuge. It is a set of Refuge
management directions applied to an area in light of its resources and
existing and potential uses to facilitate management and the
accomplishment of Refuge purposes and goals. The Management
Activities Table (table C-1) shows those management activities, public
uses, commercial uses, and facilities that may be allowed in each
management category and under what conditions.
1.2.1 Wilderness
This category applies only to areas designated by Congress as units of
the National Wilderness Preservation System; areas proposed for
Wilderness designation will be managed under Minimal management,
consistent with section 1317(c) of Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (ANILCA) and U.S Fish & Wildlife Service (Service)
policy. Designated Wilderness will be managed under the Wilderness
Act of 1964 and the exceptions provided by ANILCA. Because
Wilderness units are part of a nationwide, multi-agency system, the
Service recognizes that responsibilities for managing Refuge
Wilderness go beyond the mission of the Service and that the purposes
of the Wilderness Act are within and supplemental to the other
purposes for which individual refuges were established. (Also, see
section 1.3.17.)
The history and intent behind the Wilderness Act make Wilderness
more than just another category of management. Wilderness
encourages having a broadened perspective of the Refuge landscape,
one that extends beyond managing it solely as wildlife habitat.
Wilderness is managed as an area “retaining its primeval character and
influence.” In addition, Wilderness provides human visitors with
opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of
recreation, which may be characterized in terms of experiential
dimensions such as discovery, self-reliance, and challenge.
Wilderness areas are managed to preserve their experiential, aesthetic,
scientific, and other related values. Research has shown that some
values of Wilderness extend beyond their boundaries to people who
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-5
may never visit but who benefit from the protection of natural
ecological processes—benefits such as clean air and water and the
simple knowledge that such places exist. In managing Wilderness,
managers are encouraged to consider these off-site and symbolic values
as well as tangible resource values.
Permanent structures are generally prohibited; examples of exceptions
are historic and cultural resources and in certain circumstances,
administrative structures or cabins that predate ANILCA, cabins that
are necessary for trapping, and public use cabins necessary for the
protection of human health and safety. Facilities and structures are
rustic and unobtrusive in appearance.
Compatible commercial uses of Wilderness areas are generally limited
to those activities that facilitate wilderness recreation (e.g., guided
fishing, hunting, and wilderness trips). All commercial activities and
facilities require authorizations such as special use permits.
Actions such as prescribed fires or invasive species control may be
conducted when necessary to protect life or property, or to restore,
maintain, or protect wilderness values. Management activities in
Wilderness must be found to be the minimum requirements for the
administration of the area as Wilderness.
1.2.2 Minimal Management
Minimal management is designed to maintain the natural environment
with very little evidence of human-caused change. Habitats should be
allowed to change and function through natural processes.
Administration will ensure that the resource values and environmental
characteristics identified in the Comprehensive Conservation Plan are
conserved. Public uses, economic activities, and facilities should
minimize disturbance to habitats and resources. Ground-disturbing
activities are to be avoided whenever possible.
Management actions in this category focus on understanding natural
systems and monitoring the health of Refuge resources. Generally, no
roads or permanent structures are allowed (except cabins). Temporary
structures may be allowed in situations in which removal is planned
after the period of authorized use, and the site can be rehabilitated
using plants native to the immediate area. Existing cabins may be
allowed for administrative, public use, subsistence, or commercial or
economic (e.g., guiding) purposes. New subsistence or commercial
cabins may be authorized if no reasonable alternatives exist. Public use
or administrative cabins may be constructed if necessary for health and
safety.
Public use of the Refuge for wildlife-dependent recreation and
subsistence activities is encouraged. Public use facilities are not
generally provided. Mechanized and motorized equipment may be
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-6 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
allowed when the overall impacts are temporary or where its use
furthers management goals.
If a transportation or utility system, as defined in section 1102 of the
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), is
proposed to cross an area in Minimal management, the authorization
process would incorporate a corresponding Comprehensive
Conservation Plan amendment to change the management category in
the affected area from Minimal management to Moderate or Intensive
management, as appropriate.
Compatible economic activities may be allowed where the evidence of
those activities does not last past the season of use, except as noted in
the preceding discussion of cabins. The primary economic activities are
likely to be guiding and outfitting of recreation activities such as
hunting, fishing, hiking, river floating, and sightseeing. All economic
activities and facilities require authorizations such as special use
permits.
1.2.3 Moderate Management
Moderate management is meant to allow compatible management
actions, public uses, commercial uses, and facilities that may result in
changes to the natural environment that are temporary or permanent
but small in scale and that do not disrupt natural processes. The natural
landscape is the dominant feature of Moderate management areas,
although signs of human actions may be visible.
Management actions in the Moderate management category will focus
on maintaining, restoring, or enhancing habitats to maintain healthy
populations of plants and animals where natural processes
predominate. For example, logging and prescribed burning may be
used to convert mature forests to earlier native seral stages to enhance
browse for moose. In general, management facilities, both temporary
and permanent, will be allowed for the purposes of gathering data
needed to understand and manage resources and natural systems of the
Refuge. Structures will be designed to minimize overall visual impact.
Public facilities provided in Moderate management will, while
protecting habitats and resources, allow the public to enjoy and use
Refuge resources in low numbers over a large area, or they will
encourage the short-term enjoyment of the Refuge in focused areas.
The emphasis is on small facilities that encourage outdoor experiences.
Facilities such as public use cabins, rustic campgrounds, kiosks, viewing
platforms, trails, and toilets may be provided. Facilities will be designed
to blend with the surrounding environment.
Compatible economic activities may be allowed where impacts to
natural processes and habitats are temporary (e.g., small-scale logging
where an earlier seral stage meets management goals; facilities in
support of guiding and outfitting services such as tent platforms or
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-7
cabins that encourage enhanced public use). All economic activities and
facilities require authorizations such as special use permits.
1.2.4 Intensive Management
This category is designed to allow compatible management actions,
public facilities, and economic activities that may result in alterations to
the natural environment. In Intensive management areas, the presence
of human intervention may be very apparent. Roads, buildings, and
other structures are likely to be seen. Intensive management is applied
to the smallest area reasonable to accommodate the intended uses.
When Intensive management is proposed for an area, the specific
purposes for its establishment will be described.
Natural processes or habitats may be modified through human
intervention. Habitats may be highly modified to enhance conditions for
one or more animal species. For example, water regimes may be
artificially controlled to improve habitat for waterfowl.
High levels of public use may be accommodated and encouraged
through modifications to the natural environment such as paving,
buildings, developed campgrounds, and other facilities that could alter
the natural environment in specific areas. Public facilities are designed
to provide a safe and enjoyable experience of the natural environment
and an increased understanding of Refuge resources for a wide range of
visitors. Facilities may accommodate a large number of visitors while
protecting Refuge resources from damage through overuse.
Compatible economic uses of Refuge resources that result in alterations
to the natural environment may be authorized in Intensive
management areas. All economic uses are subject to the compatibility
standard, must contribute to the purposes of the Refuge, and require
official authorizations such as special use permits.
1.2.5 Special Management
Special management lands are managed within one of the categories
described previously but have additional requirements because of their
status. An example of Special Management areas would be Research
Natural Areas.
1.2.5.1 Management of Selected Lands
The Service retains management responsibility for lands selected but
not yet conveyed to Native village and regional corporations or to the
State of Alaska. The appropriate Native corporation or agency of the
State of Alaska will be contacted and its views considered prior to
issuing a permit involving these lands. Fees collected for special use or
right-of-way permits will be held in escrow until the selected lands are
conveyed or relinquished. Management of these lands will be the same
as for adjacent Refuge lands.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-8 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.2.5.2 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act Section 22(g)
Section 22(g) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)
provides that those refuge lands established prior to December 18,
1971, and are conveyed under that act remain subject to the laws and
regulations governing the use and development of the Refuge. The
compatibility standard, as it applies to activities occurring on these
lands, is described in 50 CFR 25.21(b)(1). In addition, the Service
retains the right of first refusal on village corporation lands if these
lands are ever offered for sale.
The Refuge will work with landowners to balance the commercial
development and use of 22(g) lands with the protection of resources
important to Refuge purposes.
1.3 Management Policies and Guidelines
Refuge management is governed by Federal laws such as the National
Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd),
as amended (Refuge Administration Act); the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997, an amendment to the Refuge
Administration Act (P.L. 105-57) (Refuge Improvement Act); and
ANILCA; by regulations implementing these laws; by treaties; by
Service policy; and by principles of sound resource management that
establish standards for resource management or limit the range of
potential activities that may be allowed on the Refuge.
ANILCA authorizes traditional activities such as subsistence; the
exercise of valid commercial fishing rights; and hunting, fishing, and
trapping in accordance with State and Federal laws. Under Service
regulations implementing this direction, “[p]ublic recreation activities
within the Alaska National Wildlife Refuges are authorized as long as
such activities are conducted in a manner compatible with the purposes
for which the areas were established” (50 CFR 36.31[a]). Such
recreation activities include but are not limited to sightseeing, nature
observations and photography, hunting, fishing, boating, camping,
hiking, picnicking, and other related activities. The Refuge
Administration Act, as amended by the Refuge Improvement Act,
defines “wildlife-dependent recreation” and “wildlife-dependent
recreational use” as “hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and
photography, or environmental education and interpretation” (16
U.S.C. § 668ee). These uses are encouraged and will receive emphasis
in management of public use on refuges.
1.3.1 Management Emergencies
It may be necessary, when emergencies occur on the Refuge, to deviate
from policies and guidelines discussed in the Comprehensive
Conservation Plan. Activities not allowed on the Refuge or under a
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-9
specific management category, as shown in table 1, may occur during or
as a result of emergencies. For example, if naturally occurring or
human-caused actions (e.g., landslides, floods, fires, droughts)
adversely affect Refuge resources, it may be necessary to undertake
rehabilitation, restoration, habitat improvement, water management,
fisheries enhancement, or other actions that would not otherwise be
allowed to the same extent on the Refuge. Threats to human health and
safety may also result during emergencies. In emergencies, the Refuge
manager is authorized to take prudent and reasonable actions to
protect human life and to address immediate health, safety, or critical
resource-protection needs.
1.3.2 Land Exchanges and Acquisitions
Under section 1302 of ANILCA, and subject to certain restrictions, the
Service may acquire (by purchase, donation, or exchange) any lands
within the boundaries of Alaska refuges. Proposed land exchanges or
acquisitions must benefit fish and wildlife resources, satisfy other
purposes for which the Refuge was established, or be necessary to
satisfy other national interests. The Service can also purchase
conservation easements or enter into cooperative management
agreements to meet these objectives.
1.3.3 Land Protection Plans
Department of Interior and Service policies require development of a
step-down plan, called a land protection plan, addressing priorities for
habitat conservation within Refuge boundaries. Land protection plans
inform private landowners what land within Refuge boundaries the
Service would like to see conserved for fish and wildlife habitat. The
plans do the following:
 Identify the private lands within the Refuge boundary that the
Service believes should be conserved
 Display the relative protection priority for each parcel
 Discuss alternative means of land and resource conservation
 Analyze the impacts on local residents of acquisition
The Service only acquires land from willing landowners. It is Service
policy to acquire land only when other methods of achieving goals are
not appropriate, available, or effective. Sometimes resource
conservation goals can be met through cooperative management
agreements with landowners or by similar means. The Refuge will work
with all landowners to ensure that overall fish and wildlife and habitat
values within the Refuge are conserved.
A land protection plan for the Refuge was completed in October 1994.
A pre-acquisition environmental site assessment is required for all real
property proposed for acquisition by the Service or for public domain
lands returning to Service jurisdiction (Service Manual 341 FW 3).
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-10 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1.3.4 Appropriate Refuge Uses and Compatibility
Comprehensive conservation plans include a review of the
appropriateness and compatibility of existing Refuge uses and of any
planned future public uses.
1.3.4.1 Appropriate Refuge Uses
All uses of a national wildlife refuge over which the Service has
jurisdiction must be determined to be appropriate uses under the
Appropriate Refuge Uses Policy (Service Manual 630 FW 1). An
appropriate use of a national wildlife refuge is a proposed or existing
use on a refuge that meets at least one of the following four conditions.
1) The use is a wildlife-dependent recreational use as identified in
the Refuge Improvement Act (hunting, fishing, wildlife
observation and photography, and environmental education and
interpretation).
2) The use contributes to fulfilling the refuge purpose(s), the
Refuge System mission, or goals or objectives described in a
refuge management plan approved after October 9, 1997, the
date the Refuge Improvement Act was signed into law.
3) The use involves the take of fish and wildlife under State
regulations.
4) The Refuge manager has evaluated the use following guidelines
in the Service Manual 603 FW 1.11 (listed below) and found it
appropriate.
a) Do we have jurisdiction over the use?
b) Does the use comply with applicable laws and
regulations (Federal, State, tribal, and local)?
c) Is the use consistent with applicable executive orders,
Department of the Interior and Service policies?
d) Is the use consistent with public safety?
e) Is the use consistent with goals and objectives in an
approved management plan or other document?
f) Has an earlier documented analysis not denied the use,
or is this the first time the use has been proposed?
g) Is the use manageable within available budget and staff?
h) Will this be manageable in the future within existing
resources?
i) Does the use contribute to the public’s understanding
and appreciation of the Refuge’s natural or cultural
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-11
resources, or is the use beneficial to the Refuge’s natural
or cultural resources?
j) Can the use be accommodated without impairing
existing wildlife-dependent recreational uses or
reducing the potential to provide quality, compatible,
wildlife-dependent recreation in the future?
This plan identifies those existing and proposed uses that are found
appropriate and compatible. If additional uses not addressed in this
plan are proposed for the Refuge, the Refuge manager will determine if
they are appropriate uses following guidance in the Service Manual
(603 FW 1).
1.3.4.2 Compatibility Determinations
The Refuge Administration Act states that “the Secretary [of the
Interior] is authorized, under such regulations as he [or she] may
prescribe, to… permit the use of any area within the [Refuge] System
for any purpose, including but not limited to hunting, fishing, public
recreation and accommodations, and access whenever he [or she]
determines that such uses are compatible . . . .”
A compatible use is a proposed or existing wildlife-dependent
recreation use or any other use of a national wildlife refuge that, based
on sound professional judgment, will not materially interfere with nor
detract from the fulfillment of the Refuge System mission or the
purposes for which the national wildlife refuge was established.
Compatibility determinations are not required for refuge management
activities, except economic activities. Economic uses of a natural
resource must contribute to achieving refuge purposes or the Refuge
System mission. They are also not required where statute directs
mandatory approval of the activity, as in the case of facilities for
national defense.
If a use is found to be incompatible, the Refuge will follow normal
administrative procedures for stopping the action. If the use is a new
use requiring a special use permit, the Refuge manager will not issue a
permit. If the use is an existing use already under permit, the Refuge
manager will work with the permittee to modify the use to make it
compatible or will terminate the permit.
Ending incompatible uses that do not require a special use permit or
other formal authorization, or that cannot be addressed by other
Federal or State agencies, require the Refuge to initiate a closure or
restriction consistent with the provisions of 50 CFR 36.42. Permanent
closures or restrictions can be made only after notice and public
hearings in appropriate communities and publication in the Federal
Register.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-12 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Compatibility determinations for existing hunting, fishing, wildlife
observation and photography, and environmental education and
interpretation must be re-evaluated with the preparation or revision of
a comprehensive conservation plan or at least every 15 years,
whichever is earlier. Refuge compatibility determinations for all other
uses must be re-evaluated every 10 years or earlier if conditions change
or significant new information relative to the use and its effects
becomes available.
Compatibility determinations for Kenai Refuge were completed in 2007.
To review completed compatibility determinations for all refuges in
Alaska, go to http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/planning/completed.htm.
Additional details on applying compatibility standards and completing
refuge compatibility determinations are found in the compatibility
regulations at 50 CFR (Parts 25, 26, and 29) and in the Service Manual
(603 FW 2).
1.3.4.3 Mitigation
In the interest of serving the public, it is the policy of the Service,
throughout the nation, to seek to prevent, reduce, or compensate for
losses of fish, wildlife, and their habitats, and uses thereof, from land
and water development. To that end, the Service developed a Mitigation
Policy in 1981 that includes measures ranging from avoiding an activity
that results in loss of such resources to seeking compensation by
replacement of or substitution for resource loss.
The Service will promulgate regulations, develop stipulations, and issue
permits to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts resulting from
compatible activities that may be authorized under this Plan. These
regulations, stipulations, and permits would mitigate impacts in a variety
of means, as stipulated in the Mitigation Policy guidelines (Service
Manual 501 FW 2.1). The means, in order of application, are as follows:
1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain
action or parts of an action
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of
the action and its implementation
3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or
restoring the affected environment
4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by
preservation and maintenance operations during the life of
the action
5. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing
substitute resources or environments
When determining activities or uses are compatible, projects should be
designed first to avoid adverse impacts. The Service generally does not
allow compensatory mitigation on Refuge System lands. Only in
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-13
limited and exceptional circumstances related to existing right-of-ways
could compensatory mitigation be used to find a use compatible. The
Service Manual (501 FW 2 and 603 FW 2) provides more information.
Mitigation may consist of standard stipulations such as those attached
to right-of-way permits; special stipulations that may be attached to
leases or permits on a site-specific basis; and site-specific, project-specific
mitigation identified through detailed step-down management
plans or the environmental assessment process. In all instances,
mitigation must support the mission of the Refuge System and must be
compatible with the purposes of the Refuge. The degree, type, and
extent of mitigation undertaken would depend on the site-specific
conditions present and the management goals and objectives of the
action being implemented.
1.3.5 Coastal Zone Consistency
Although Federal lands, including lands in the Refuge System, are
excluded from the coastal zone (16 U.S.C., section 1453[1]), the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, directs Federal agencies
conducting activities within the coastal zone or that may affect any land
or water use or natural resources of the coastal zone to conduct these
activities in a manner that is consistent “to the maximum extent
practicable”1
Certain Federal actions may require a Federal Coastal Consistency
Determination. The Refuge will contact the Department of Natural
with approved State management programs (16 U.S.C.
1456).
The Alaska Coastal Zone Management Act of 1977, as amended, and
the subsequent Alaska Coastal Management Program, as amended, and
Final Environmental Impact Statement (1979) establish policy guidance
and standards for the review of projects within or potentially affecting
Alaska’s coastal zone. In addition, specific policies have been developed
for activities and uses of coastal lands and water resources within
regional coastal resource districts. Most incorporated cities,
municipalities, boroughs and unincorporated areas (coastal resource
service areas) within the coastal zone now have State-approved coastal
management programs.
Although State and coastal district program policies are to guide
consistency determinations, more restrictive Federal agency standards
may be applied. Federal regulations state that “(w)hen Federal agency
standards are more restrictive than standards or requirements
contained in the State’s management program, the Federal agency may
continue to apply its stricter standards . . .” (15 CFR 930.39[d]).
1“To the maximum extent practicable” means “to the fullest degree permitted by existing law (15 CFR 930.32).”
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-14 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Resources’ Alaska Coastal Management Program for program
applicability before beginning a project that may affect the coastal zone.
Section 7.3 of Volume 1, Chapter 7 is a consistency determination
covering all the alternatives for management of Kenai Refuge that are
addressed in this document.
1.3.6 Cooperation and Coordination with Others
1.3.6.1 Federal, State, and Local Governments
The Refuge will continue to work closely with those Federal, State, and
local governments and agencies whose programs affect or are affected
by the Refuge. State, and local government input will be sought during
the development of regulatory policies addressing management of the
Refuge System (Executive Order 13083, “Federalism”). When possible,
the Service will participate in interagency activities (such as joint fish
and wildlife surveys and co-funded research). It will enter into
cooperative agreements and share data, equipment, and/or aircraft
costs to meet mutual management goals and objectives.
The Refuge and the State of Alaska will cooperatively manage fish
and wildlife resources within the Refuge. The Master Memorandum of
Understanding between the Service and the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game, dated March 13, 1982, defines the cooperative
management roles of each agency (Volume 2, Appendix B). In this
agreement, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game agreed to
“recognize the Service as the agency with the responsibility to
manage migratory birds, endangered species, and other species
mandated by Federal law, and on Service lands in Alaska to conserve
fish and wildlife and their habitats and regulate human use.”
Correspondingly, the Service agreed to “recognize the right of the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game as the agency with the primary
responsibility to manage fish and resident wildlife within the State of
Alaska.” Further discussion of intergovernmental cooperation
regarding the preservation, use, and management of fish and wildlife
resources is found in 43 CFR 24 (Department of the Interior Fish and
Wildlife Policy: State and Federal Relationships).
The Service does not require Refuge compatibility determinations for
State wildlife management activities on a national wildlife refuge
pursuant to a cooperative agreement between the State of Alaska
(State) and the Service where the Refuge manager has made a written
determination that such activities support fulfilling the Refuge
purposes or the Refuge System mission. When the activity proposed by
the State is not part of a cooperative agreement or the State is not
acting as the Service’s agent, a special use permit may be required, and
a Refuge compatibility determination will need to be completed before
the activity may be allowed. Separate Refuge compatibility
determinations addressing specific proposals will be required for State
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-15
management activities that propose predator management, fish and
wildlife control (with the exception of emergency removal of individual
rogue animals), reintroduction of species, non-native species
management, pest management, disease prevention and control, fishery
restoration, fishery enhancement, native fish introductions, non-native
species introductions, construction of facilities, helicopter and off-road
vehicle access, or any other un-permitted activity (an activity that is not
allowed) that could alter ecosystems on the Refuge.
The Service will cooperate with other State agencies such as the
Department of Natural Resources and Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities on matters of mutual interest and may enter into
informal and formal management agreements.
1.3.6.2 Tribes and Native American Organizations
The Service’s Native American Policy (USFWS 1994) identifies general
principles that guide the Service’s government-to-government
relationships with tribal governments in the conservation of fish and
wildlife resources. Additional guidance has been provided by Executive
Order 13084, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments,” issued May 14, 1998, and the Department of the
Interior–Alaska Policy on Government-to-Government Relations with
Alaska Native Tribes, issued January 18, 2001 (DOI 2001). The Refuge
will maintain government-to-government relationships with tribal
governments. The Refuge will also work directly with regional and
village corporations and respect Native American cultural values when
planning and implementing Refuge programs.
1.3.6.3 Owners of Refuge Inholdings and Adjacent Lands
The Refuge will work cooperatively with inholders and adjacent
landowners, providing information on Refuge management activities
and policies. The Refuge will consult periodically with them regarding
topics of mutual interest; will respond promptly to concerns over
Refuge programs; and will participate in cooperative projects (e.g.,
water quality monitoring and fish and wildlife management).
1.3.6.4 Fish and Wildlife Service Jurisdiction over Waters
within Kenai Refuge
Where the United States holds title to submerged lands beneath waters
within the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge), the Service has
jurisdiction over activities on the water. The United States owns the
large majority of submerged lands beneath navigable and non-navigable
waters within the external boundaries of Kenai National
Wildlife Refuge. The Service’s statutory authority to manage these
lands and waters is based the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, as amended.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-16 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
In 1941, the United States withdrew and reserved most submerged
lands of the Kenai NWR by Executive Order 8979 that established the
Kenai National Moose Range (Moose Range). This pre-statehood
withdrawal and reservation has maintained Federal ownership of
submerged lands beneath navigable waters that otherwise would have
transferred to the State of Alaska in 1959 under the Equal Footing
Doctrine, the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, and the Alaska Statehood
Act of 1958. Tustumena Lake is one example of a large and navigable
Refuge water body whose submerged lands did not pass to the State
because it was within the former Kenai National Moose Range.
On March 20, 1970 the Ninth Circuit Court overturned a lower court
decision that had entered a summary judgment to quiet title to the
submerged land in Tustumena Lake to the State of Alaska. The Ninth
Circuit Court found that the intent of Executive Order 8979 was to
reserve both land and water of Lake Tustumena within the boundary of
the Kenai National Moose Range to the United States. The court found
that the submerged land in Tustumena Lake belonged to the United
States and was managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service).
In 1980, under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
(ANILCA), Congress expanded the Moose Range and renamed it the
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, retaining all federally owned pre-statehood
lands, waters, interests, and submerged lands. Those areas
of land and water added to the new Refuge under ANILCA (e.g., the
extreme southern region of the Refuge) contain both non-navigable and
navigable waters. State laws and regulations apply everywhere on the
lands and waters of the Refuge unless they conflict with or are
preempted by Federal laws or regulations or both.
1.3.6.5 Other Constituencies
The Refuge will inform local communities, special interest groups, and
others who have expressed an interest in or are affected by Refuge
programs about Refuge management policies and activities. The
Refuge will seek input from these constituents when issues arise that
may affect how the Refuge is managed. When appropriate, local
residents and other stakeholders will be asked to participate in Refuge
activities so their expertise and local knowledge can be incorporated
into Refuge management.
1.3.7 Ecosystem and Landscape Management
Species do not function alone; they function together in the
environment as part of an ecosystem. Refuge resources will be
managed by employing ecosystem-management concepts. Individual
species are viewed as integral to the diversity of those ecosystems and
are indicators of the healthy functioning of the entire ecosystem. When
the Service identifies species to use as indicators of the health of an
ecosystem, it will do so through a rigorous peer-reviewed scientific
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-17
process involving experts from other Federal agencies and the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game.
Inventorying, monitoring, and maintaining a comprehensive database
of selected ecosystem components are critical for making Refuge
management decisions and for ensuring proper long-term ecosystem
stewardship. This includes regular and recurring monitoring of status
and trends of ecosystem components such as fish, wildlife, plants,
climatic conditions, soils, and waterbodies. All monitoring will employ
appropriate disciplines, new technologies, and scientific capabilities
whenever practical.
1.3.7.1 Air Quality
The Service’s authorities for air quality management are included in
several laws. The most direct mandates to manage air resources are
found in the Wilderness Act and the Clean Air Act.
The Service is required by the Clean Air Act to preserve, protect,
and enhance air quality and air quality-related values on Service
lands. Air quality-related values include visibility, plants, animals,
soil, water quality, cultural and historical resources, and virtually all
resources that are dependent upon and affected by air quality. In
addition, the Wilderness Act requires the Service to protect and
preserve the wilderness character, including the pristine air quality,
of designated areas.
Class I air quality sites receive the highest level of protection. Very
little deterioration is allowed in these areas, and the Federal land
manager has an “affirmative responsibility” to protect air quality-related
values on those lands. With the exception of three Class I air
quality sites in designated Wilderness on the Alaska Maritime National
Wildlife Refuge, all other lands managed by the Service in Alaska are
classified as Class II and receive protection through the Clean Air Act.
Moderate deterioration, associated with well-managed growth, is
allowed in Class II areas.
If air quality or related resources are at risk, the Refuge manager will
work with the Service’s Air Quality Branch; the regional air quality
coordinator; the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
and other State, local, and Federal agencies; and the public, as
appropriate, in developing an air quality management plan as outlined
in the Service Manual (563 FW 2.8).
1.3.7.2 Water Resources (Hydrology) Management
Every national wildlife refuge in Alaska shares the common purpose of
ensuring that water resources are maintained and protected. ANILCA
mandates that the Service safeguard water quality and necessary water
quantity within refuges and to conserve fish and wildlife populations
and habitats in their natural diversity.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-18 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Although the Service has reserved water rights sufficient to accomplish
the purposes of the refuges, the Refuge Administration Act and the
Service Manual (403 FW 1 through 3) direct the Service to obtain, to
the extent practicable, water supplies of adequate quantity and quality
for Service facilities, for Refuge purposes, and as trust resources; and
to obtain the legal right to use that water through State laws,
regulations, and procedures.
The Alaska Region of the Service conducted a water resources threats
analysis (Harle 1994) for the purpose of guiding water resource
investigations and protecting water resources by acquiring instream
water rights. Based on the results of the threats analysis, the Service’s
regional office developed a strategic plan for systematically quantifying
the surface water on refuges within Alaska (Bayha et al. 1997).
Using existing data or through the collection of hydrologic and biologic
data, the Service applies to the State of Alaska for appropriative water
rights, for instream water reservations, and for water withdrawals to
meet the Service’s needs. Establishing State water rights is only a part
of a management strategy to protect Refuge resources and to
understand ecosystem processes. Collection of hydrologic data allows
the Service to accomplish the following:
 Plan flood plain and riparian zone management
 Estimate flow for ungauged streams within the Refuge
 Supplement historical or current fisheries and wildlife
studies
 Detect and evaluate future natural or human-induced
changes in the hydrologic system
 Provide stream profile and velocity data for the design of fish
weirs or other structures
 Estimate the potential for future flooding and erosion
 Analyze the impacts of proposed projects on stream flow and
water supply
 Provide a basis for decision-making about commercial
operations on some important streams.
 Provide baseline water quality information.
All facilities and activities on refuges must comply with pollution
control standards set by Federal laws (e.g., the Clean Water Act 33
U.S.C. 1251 and the Safe Drinking Water Act 42 U.S.C. 300f); State
laws where Federal law so provides; and the regulations, policies, and
standards implementing these laws.
1.3.7.3 Visual Resource Management
Visual resource management has two primary purposes: (1) to manage
the quality of the visual environment and (2) to reduce the visual impact
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-19
of development activities. To accomplish these purposes, the Refuge
will identify and maintain scenic values and will, within the constraints
imposed by the Comprehensive Conservation Plan, minimize the visual
impacts of Refuge development and uses. All activities and facilities on
the Refuge will be designed to blend into the landscape to the extent
practical. The Service will cooperate with other Federal, State, local,
tribal, and private agencies and organizations to prevent significant
deterioration of visual resources.
1.3.7.4 Cultural, Historical, and Paleontological Resources
The Service has long-term responsibilities for cultural resources on
Refuge lands. Cultural resources on Refuge lands are managed under a
number of laws, executive orders, and regulations, including the
Antiquities Act; the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended;
the Archaeological Resources Protection Act; the American Indian
Religious Freedom Act; the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act; Executive Order 11593, “Protection and
Enhancement of the Cultural Environment”; Executive Order 13007,
“Indian Sacred Sites”; and 36 CFR 800.
The 1980 amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act direct
the Service to inventory and evaluate cultural resources for their
eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.
Pending a complete evaluation, all cultural resources will be considered
potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. All
significant historic, archaeological, cultural, and paleontological
resources on the Refuge will be protected and managed in accordance
with Federal and State law.
A cultural resource plan for the Refuge will be completed by 2013. This
plan provides guidance for cultural resource management on the Refuge.
It outlines legal mandates and considerations, reviews current
information about resources, and establishes goals and objectives for the
program. The cultural resource plan should be updated every five years.
It is illegal to collect archaeological materials and/or paleontological
remains on the Refuge without a permit. Historic aircraft and other
World War II material will be managed in accordance with the policy
published December 20, 1985, in the Federal Register (FR 50:51952-
51953). These materials may be collected on Refuge lands only as
authorized by a permit issued to a qualified organization or individual.
Cultural resource research permits will only be issued to qualified
individuals operating under appropriate research designs. The Refuge
will encourage archaeologists, historians, ethnologists, and
paleontologists from educational institutions and other government
agencies to pursue their research interests on Refuge lands as long as
these research interests are compatible with Refuge purposes.
Research that collects data from threatened sites and minimizes
disturbance to intact sites will be encouraged.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-20 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
When any Federal undertaking—including any action funded or
authorized by the Federal government and having the potential to
directly or indirectly affect any archaeological or historic site—is
planned, a consultation must be initiated with the State Historic
Preservation Officer under section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act. If sites that may be affected are found in the project
area, their significance will be evaluated to determine their eligibility
for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. For eligible
sites, consultation will result in a course of action causing the least
possible impact. Impacts may be minimized in a variety of ways,
including relocation or redesign of a project, site hardening, mitigation
through information collection, or cancellation of the project if no
alternatives are feasible. To protect archaeological and historic sites,
other uses may be precluded. Private interests proposing to conduct
commercial uses on the Refuge will normally be required to fund
studies necessary for consultation and for mitigation of impacts.
The Refuge will implement Executive Order 13007, “Indian Sacred
Sites”, allowing access to identified sacred sites and avoiding adversely
affecting the physical integrity of these sites. Where appropriate, the
Service will maintain the confidentiality of sacred sites.
Further information on cultural resources management can be found in
the Service Manual (614 FW 1 through 5) and the Cultural Resources
Handbook (USFWS 1992).
1.3.8 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management
1.3.8.1 Habitat Management
Habitats are managed in keeping with the purposes, goals, and
objectives of a refuge. In Alaska, this means habitats are largely
managed to maintain natural diversity and natural processes. However,
in some cases, habitats are manipulated to maintain or improve
conditions for selected fish and wildlife populations, to control invasive
plant species, or to manage fire fuels on Refuge lands. These habitat
management and manipulation activities will be carried out in support
of the purposes, goals, and objectives of the Refuge. Generally, refuges
use the least intrusive management measures needed. Where practical
and economically feasible, habitat management practices should
maintain a natural appearance on the landscape. Habitat management
practices, even those carried out for the benefit of a single species or
small group of species, will maintain the natural diversity of native
(indigenous) wildlife species and habitat types to the extent possible.
Habitat management and manipulation may be achieved by mechanical,
chemical, and manual methods, including the use of fire, or by a
combination of methods. Mechanical treatment could include
mechanical removal, crushing, cutting, or mowing. When applicable,
State and Federal guidelines for timber management will be followed.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-21
Mechanical treatment could also include the construction of fish
passages, fish ladders, fish barriers, water impoundments, and
structures such as fences or artificial nests; and raising or lowering of
water levels to manage wildlife or waterfowl habitat. Riparian or
aquatic habitat management and manipulation may be achieved by
acquiring instream flow reservations or making beneficial water
diversions.
Chemical treatment involves the use of chemicals to restore nutrient
levels in a lake system (fertilization) for fisheries restoration, to reduce
hazardous fuels, or to eliminate invasive plant and animal species,
normally by killing them or destroying their ability to spread or
prosper. Before chemical treatment is approved for use, the Refuge will
analyze the need for action, the options for treatment, and the potential
impacts of those options through the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) process. Pest control, including integrated pest
management, is discussed in section 1.3.9.8.
Manual treatment could include the use of hand tools to remove, reduce,
or modify plants or to modify habitats (e.g., removal of beaver dams).
Aquatic habitat modification may include activities and structures such
as streambank restoration, passage structures, fish barriers, or
obstacle removal that results in physical modification of aquatic or
riparian habitats. These activities would be undertaken to maintain or
restore native fish populations and may require appropriate NEPA
compliance and Refuge compatibility determinations.
1.3.8.2 Fire Management
Fire management is the full range of activities necessary to conserve,
protect, and enhance habitat and to maintain desired ecological
conditions for the benefit of fish and wildlife. Fire management
activities include preparedness, emergency suppression operations,
wildland fire use, fire prevention, education, monitoring, research,
prescribed fire, hazardous fuel reduction, and mechanical treatments.
All activities will be conducted in accordance with Refuge, Service, and
Department of Interior policies and approved interagency and Refuge-specific
fire management plans. Additional guidance on fire
management can be found in the Service Manual (621 FW 1 through 3).
Fire management plans provide the basis for integrating fire as a
critical natural process into other Refuge plans and activities at a
landscape scale. The Refuge fire management plan provides specific
information on the application and management of fire on the Refuge.
The Alaska Interagency Wildland Fire Management Plan provides a
cooperative framework and operational guidelines for the suppression
of wildland fires. The suppression of human-caused and unwanted
wildland fires and the use of nature-caused wildland fires and
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-22 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
prescribed fires as management tools are important management
prerogatives.
Wildland Fire Suppression
Fire suppression activity is the work of confining, constraining,
controlling, or monitoring a fire or portion of a fire to protect, prevent,
or reduce the loss of identified values. Suppression takes place, with the
highest priority being the safety of firefighters and the public, using the
appropriate management response based on values to be protected. The
Alaska Interagency Wildland Fire Management Plan, amended in
October 1998, is the guiding document for suppression actions. The plan
establishes four management options—critical, full, modified, and
limited—that direct a range of wildlife fire management responses.
Refuge lands have been classified by fire management zones for
limited, modified, or full suppression, with all facilities mapped.
The Bureau of Land Management Alaska Fire Service (BLM/AFS)
provides emergency suppression services on Refuge lands in Alaska
(Department Manual 620 DM 2), as directed by the Refuge manager.
Through a cooperative agreement with BLM/AFS, the State of Alaska
Division of Forestry provides emergency suppression services on
Refuge lands in State protection zones, as directed by the Refuge
manager.
Wildland Fire Use
Wildland fire use is the application of the appropriate management
response to naturally ignited wildland fires to accomplish resource
management objectives outlined in fire management plans. Wildland
fires may be used to protect, maintain, and enhance natural and
cultural resources and, as nearly as possible, wildland fires will be
allowed to function in their natural ecological role. Optional
management is described in each Refuge fire management plan.
Prescribed Fire
Prescribed fires are ignited by management action to meet specific
wildland fuel, vegetation, and habitat management objectives. Prior to
each ignition, a written, approved plan outlining prescription conditions
is required. Use of prescribed fires must also comply with the Alaska
Enhanced Smoke Management Plan for Prescribed Fire. The plan
provides guidance and direction concerning smoke issues related to
prescribed fire.
1.3.9 Fish and Wildlife Population Management
Conservation of habitat is a key element in maintaining the natural
diversity of populations on the Refuge, and management of native fish
and wildlife populations is an important component of maintaining
healthy ecosystems. The Refuge will be managed in accordance with
the purposes of the Refuge and consistent with the Policy on
Maintaining Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health
of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Service Manual 601 FW 3) to
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-23
ensure native species are managed in their natural diversity and
abundance.
The Refuge will work with the State of Alaska to conserve fish and
wildlife populations, recognizing that populations may experience
fluctuations in abundance because of environmental factors and may
require management actions for conservation purposes. The Refuge
will be managed to maintain the genetic variability of wild, native fish
stocks.
1.3.9.1 Wildlife Inventory and Monitoring Plan
To assess presence, relative abundance, distribution, and trends in
populations of fish, wildlife, and plants, the Refuge will draft a Wildlife
Inventory and Monitoring Plan (I & M Plan) The I & M Plan describes
objectives, justification, methods, management implications, geographic
scale, report schedules, and database management for studies on
species targeted for inventory and monitoring. The I & M Plan will
include studies that address environmental parameters (e.g., weather),
hydrology, soils, and fire history to explain potential changes in the
distribution, relative abundance, and populations of fish, wildlife, and
plants. The I & M Plan will be forwarded to the regional office for
review by the regional Refuge biologist and other professional staff
prior to final approval by the regional Refuge chief. The Refuge will
update its I & M Plan every two years, but will only need regional
review and approval every five to eight years.
1.3.9.2 Scientific Peer Review
Biologists, ecologists, botanists, and other Refuge personnel conducting
scientific investigations will adhere to Refuge, regional, Service, and
Department of Interior policies on scientific conduct, including
scientific peer review. The overall goal of scientific peer review is to
ensure that information collected, analyzed, interpreted, and reported
to the public, and upon which policy and management decisions are
based, meets established standards of the scientific community. To
achieve this goal, study plans for projects longer than two weeks and
reports to be disseminated to the public must be peer reviewed. The
region’s peer review procedure is available upon request. The type and
level of review shall be commensurate with the potential significance of
the scientific information and its likely influence on policy and
management actions.
1.3.9.3 Compliance with the Animal Welfare Act
The Animal Welfare Act of 1996, as amended, established legal
standards for animal care and use. To prescribe methods and set
standards for the design, performance, and conduct of animal care and
use, research facilities and Federal agencies must establish an
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). Field studies
conducted or authorized by Refuge employees within the purview of the
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-24 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Animal Welfare Act will require review and approval of an IACUC. Any
Refuge study that involves an invasive procedure or that harms or
materially alters the behavior of an animal under study should be
reviewed and approved by an IACUC prior to implementing field work.
Note that a scientific collection permit is also required from the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game under 5 Alaska Administrative Code
92.033.
1.3.9.4 Marking and Banding
These activities include fish and wildlife capture, marking, banding,
radio-collaring, release, tracking, and other information gathering
techniques. Cooperation with appropriate partners, including the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, will be stressed, and specific
protocols will be followed, taking advantage of all appropriate
disciplines and new technologies wherever possible.
1.3.9.5 Threatened or Endangered Species
The Refuge will consult with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Ecological
Services field office on actions that may affect listed, proposed, or
candidate species or designated or proposed critical habitat. These
actions include Refuge operations, public use programs, private lands
and Federal assistance activities, promulgating regulations, and issuing
permits (USFWS 1973, Section 7 Consultation Handbook 1998).
1.3.9.6 Reintroductions
A species may be introduced on a Refuge only if that species is native
to the Refuge (i.e., a reintroduction). Non-native species may not be
introduced. Definitions of native and non-native species are found in
the glossary.
Reintroductions can be useful tools for restoring species to natural
ranges and reestablishing a refuge’s natural fish, wildlife, and habitat
diversity. Reintroductions would require appropriate NEPA
compliance; a review to ensure consistency with the Policy on
Maintaining Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health
of the National Wildlife Refuge System; an ANILCA section 810
determination; and a refuge compatibility determination.
Reintroductions also require extensive coordination with adjacent
landowners and with the State of Alaska. In evaluating the project, the
cause(s) of the extirpation should be evaluated and management actions
taken to alleviate the cause(s) prior to reintroduction.
The environmental requirements of the species and the ecological
dynamics of the area proposed for the reintroduction need to be
thoroughly reviewed prior to a reintroduction. Some factors to consider
include behavior, diseases, general ecology of the species, habitat
requirements, inter- and intra-species competition, life history,
genetics, management practices, population dynamics, and predators.
Consideration should be given to whether there have been significant
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-25
habitat changes since the species’ extirpation (e.g., is the area still
within the species’ natural range?).
1.3.9.7 Fish and Wildlife Control
These activities involve the control, relocation, and/or removal of native
species, including predators, to maintain natural diversity of fish,
wildlife, and habitats. These management actions may be employed
with species of fish and wildlife within their original range to restore
other depleted native populations. These activities are subject to
appropriate NEPA compliance, an ANILCA section 810 determination,
and a Refuge compatibility determination.
Predator management includes the relocation, removal, sterilization, and
other management of native predators to accomplish management
objectives. The Service considers predator management to be a legitimate
conservation tool when applied in a prudent and ecologically sound manner
and when other alternatives are not practical. The key requirements are
that a predator-management program be ecologically sound and
biologically justified. In keeping with the Service’s mandate to, first and
foremost, maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health of fish and wildlife populations at the refuge scale, a predator
population will not intentionally be reduced below a level consistent with
the low end of natural population cycles (see Service Manual 601 FW 3). At
Kenai Refuge, predator management actions will only be considered to
protect a reintroduced, threatened, or endangered species.
A predator-management program requires appropriate NEPA
compliance, an ANILCA section 810 determination, and if conducted by
other than the Service or an agent of the Service, a Refuge
compatibility determination. Alternative management actions must be
evaluated prior to pursuing direct predator control activities. Any
proposal to allow or implement a predator-management program on
national wildlife refuges in Alaska will be subject to public review and
closely coordinated with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
local communities, tribal governments, and adjacent landowners and/or
managers. Predator-management activities must be monitored and
evaluated for effectiveness and resource impacts.
Normal environmental education and population management
activities—such as trapper education programs and regulation changes
that allow for increased harvests of predatory animals by licensed
trappers and hunters—are not considered to be “predator
management.” The control or extirpation of non-native predators is not
considered to be “predator management” (see section 1.3.9.8).
1.3.9.8 Management of Non-native, Invasive, and Pest Species
In general, non-native species (including feral domestic animals) are not
compatible with Refuge purposes or with Refuge System policies. When a
non-native species (fish, wildlife, or plants) occurs on a refuge, the Service
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-26 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
may control or eliminate that species. Where a population of a non-native
species has already been established on a refuge and this population does
not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the mission
of the Refuge System or the purposes of the Refuge, the species may be
managed as part of the Refuge’s diverse ecosystems.
Pests are defined as those organisms (vertebrates, invertebrates,
plants, and microorganisms and their vectors) that are detrimental to
fish, wildlife, human health, fish and wildlife habitat, or to established
management goals. Pests also include noxious weeds and other
organisms classified as pests by law (Administrative Manual 30 AM 12).
Invasive species are non-native species whose introduction does or is
likely to cause economic or environmental harm, or harm to human
health. The Federal government is prohibited by executive order, law,
and policy from authorizing, funding, or carrying out actions that are
likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species
in the United States or elsewhere (Service Manual 620 FW 1). Refuge
managers conduct habitat management activities to prevent, control, or
eradicate invasive species using techniques described through an
integrated pest management plan or other similar management plan.
Refuge integrated pest management planning will address the
advantages and limitations of potential techniques, including chemical,
biological, mechanical, and cultural techniques. Management of invasive
species on refuges is guided by the National Strategy for Invasive
Species Management and conducted within the context of applicable
policy (Service Manual 620 FW 1).
By definition, invasive species cause significant impacts to the land and
water resources or to the species of plants and animals that use these
habitats. To manage invasive plants, the Refuge will include weed
inventories as part of all habitat inventories. The Refuge will review the
proposed action’s potential to introduce or spread invasive plants and
will take measures to reduce the hazards (e.g., require weed-free feed
for pack animals).
Introduced vertebrates (e.g., fox and rats) may also adversely affect
wildlife populations, particularly in island ecosystems where species
historically occurred without vertebrate predators. Presence of these
invasive species may interfere with attainment of Refuge purposes and
management goals.
Pests on refuges may also be controlled to prevent damage to private
property; and routine protection of Refuge buildings, structures and
facilities is addressed in Refuge policy (Refuge Manual 7 RM 14).
The Refuge will coordinate with other landowners and agencies and use
integrated pest management practices to enhance the detection,
prevention, and management of invasive species and other pests. Use of
chemical control measures on Refuge lands requires regional office
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-27
review and approval of a pesticide-use proposal (Administrative Manual
30 AM 12 and Refuge Manual 7 RM 14).
1.3.9.9 Disease Prevention and Control
Certain disease organisms, viruses or vectors of disease (e.g., rabies or
parasites) may threaten human health or the health and survival of
native wildlife or plant species. These threats may be managed or
eliminated after consideration of all reasonable options and consultation
with the State of Alaska and other concerned parties. This will normally
only occur when severe resource damage is likely or when public health
or safety is jeopardized. Wherever possible, an integrated approach to
pest management will be used in accordance with the Service’s
Administrative Manual (30 AM 12) and Refuge Manual (7 RM 14). If
chemical controls are used, a pesticide-use proposal must be approved.
1.3.9.10 Fishery Restoration
Fishery restoration is any management action that increases fishery
resources to allow full use of available habitat or to reach a population
level based on historical biologic data. Although the goal of restoration
is self-sustaining populations, situations may exist in which some form
of fishery management or facilities could continue indefinitely.
Where fishery resources have been severely adversely affected, the
Refuge will work with the State of Alaska, local tribes, and other
partners to restore habitats and populations to appropriate, sustainable
conditions. Restoration emphasis will focus on strategies that are the
least intrusive to ecosystems and do not compromise the viability or
genetic characteristics of the depleted population. This may include
regulatory adjustments and/or evaluations of escapement goals. If the
stocks have been reduced or are threatened, temporary restoration
facilities may be allowed in designated Wilderness or Wild River areas,
as long as the facilities will not significantly detract from the values for
which those areas were established.
1.3.9.11 Fishery Enhancement
Fishery enhancement is any management action or set of actions that is
applied to a fishery stock to supplement numbers of harvestable fish to
a level beyond that which could be naturally produced based on a
determination or reasonable estimate of historic levels. This could be
accomplished by stocking barren lakes, providing access to barren
spawning areas (fish passages), constructing hatcheries, outstocking in
productive systems, or fertilizing rearing habitat.
Refuge management priorities will focus on conserving naturally
diverse ecosystems. Fishery enhancement facilities for the purpose of
artificially increasing fish populations normally will not occur within
any management category.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
C-28 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Proposals for fishery-enhancement projects will be subject to the
provisions of NEPA regulations, an ANILCA section 810 determination,
and a Refuge compatibility determination. No fishery enhancement
facilities or activities can be authorized in Wilderness management areas,
consistent with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision on salmon
enhancement in Tustumena Lake (Wilderness Society v. United States
Fish and Wildlife Service, 353 F.3d 1051 [9th Cir. 2003]).
1.3.10 Subsistence Use Management
Title VIII of ANILCA provides that rural Alaska residents engaged in
a subsistence way of life be allowed to continue using resources within
refuges for traditional purposes. These resources include fish and
wildlife, house logs and firewood, and other plant materials (berries,
bark, etc.). Many aspects of subsistence management are addressed
outside of refuge comprehensive conservation plans. The Federal
Subsistence Board, through its rulemaking process, addresses seasons,
harvest limits, and customary and traditional use determinations. The
Federal board has established Regional Subsistence Advisory Councils
to provide for meaningful public input to the rulemaking process.
The Refuge will work with others to monitor subsistence harvest. The
Refuge will supplement the State’s ongoing harvest and resource
monitoring programs to provide additional information on the status of
fish and wildlife populations harvested for subsistence uses. This
monitoring is intended to identify potential problems before
populations of fish and wildlife become depleted and to ensure
preference is given to subsistence users as required by law. All
information the Refuge gathers through subsistence monitoring will be
shared with local State fish and game advisory committees, tribes, and
other entities. Refuge staff attend various subsistence-related
meetings, including those of local fish and game advisory committees
and Regional Subsistence Advisory Councils, and provide information
on the status of subsistence resources and management.
The noncommercial gathering by local rural residents of fruits, berries,
mushrooms, and other plant materials for subsistence uses and of dead
standing or down timber for firewood is allowed without a special use
permit. Harvest of live standing timber for house logs, firewood, or
other uses is allowed, although specific requirements vary by size and
location. See 50 CFR 36.15 for specific details. Timber stocks subject to
subsistence use will also be monitored to ensure they remain available
over the long term.
Under section 816 of ANILCA, refuge lands may be closed to the
taking of fish and wildlife if closure is deemed necessary for reasons of
public safety, administration, or to ensure the continued viability of
particular populations of fish or wildlife.
Appendix C: Management Direction, Policies, and Guidelines
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan C-29
1.3.10.1 Access for Subsistence Purposes
Access to Refuge lands by traditional means will be allowed for
subsistence purposes in accordance with section 811 of ANILCA, subject
to reasonable regulation (50 CFR 36.12). Traditional means include
snowmachines, motorboats, dog teams, and other means of surface
transportation traditionally used by local rural residents engaged in
subsistence activities. Use of these traditional means of travel will be in
compliance with State and Federal law in such a manner to prevent
waste of harvested resources or damage to the Refuge and to prevent
herding, harassment, hazing, or driving of wildlife.
1.3.10.2 Section 810 Evaluations
The Refuge will evaluate the effects of proposed activities on
subsistence use to ensure compliance with section 810 of ANILCA. The
Refuge will work with the Federal Subsistence Board, Regional
Subsistence Advisory Councils, local fish and game advisory
committees, tribes, Native corporations, the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game, and other appropriate local sources to determine whether a
proposed activity would “significantly restrict” subsistence uses. If the
Refuge determines that a proposal would probably result in adverse
effects to subsistence use, the Refuge would follow the requirements
identified in section 810 before making a final decision on the proposal.
1.3.11 Public Access and Transportation Management
1.3.11.1 Snowmachines, Motorboats, Airplanes, and
Nonmotorized Surface Transportation
Section 1110(a) of ANILCA allows the use of snowmachines (during
periods of adequate snow cover and frozen river conditions),
motorboats, airplanes, and nonmotorized surface transportation
methods for traditional activities and for travel to and from villages and
homesites. Such access shall be subject to reasonable regulations to
protect the natural and other values of the Refuge (43 CFR 36.11). See
Kenai specific regulations at 50 CFR 36.39(i)(1)(2)(4) and (7)(vi).
Specific areas may be closed, in accordance wit