HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA2320TK
1425
.58
H54
Do.2320
BIG GAME STUDIES
VOLUME I BIG GAME SUMMARY REPORT
\LASKA DEPA:RTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
Submitted to the Alaska Power Authority
April 1984
DOCUMENT No.2320
-
....
.....
"""
....
.-
!
c"g~
,I
B~l{
~o•.J,.3~o
SUS I TNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
1983 ANNUAL REPORT
BIG GAME STUDIES
VOLUME I.BIG GAME SUMMARY REPORT
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
submi tted to the
Alaska Power Authori ty
August,1984
ARLIS
Alaska Res.ources
Librarv &Information Services
A,nchorage,Alaska
....
PREFACE
In early 1980,the Alaska Department of Fish and Game contracted
with the Alaska Power Authority to collect information useful in
.a.ssessing the impacts of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric
Project on moose,caribou,wolf,wolverine,black bear,brown
bear and Dall sheep.
The studies were broken into phases which conformed to the
anticipated licensing schedule.Phase I studies,January I,1980
to June 30,1982,were intended to provide information needed to
support a FERC license application.Thi s included general
studies of wildlife populations to determine how each species
used the area and identify potential impact mechani sms.Phase I I
studies began in order to provide additional information during
t:he anticipated 2 to 3 year period between application and final
FERC approval of the license.Belukha whales were added to the
species being studied.In these annual or final reports,we are
narrowing the focus of our studies to evaluate specific impact
mechanisms,quantify impacts and evaluate mi tigation measures.
'1~hi sis the second annual report after the final Phase I reports
(1982).In some cases,obj ecti ves of Phase I were continued to
provide a more complete data base.Therefore,this report is not
intended as a complete assessment of the impacts of the Susitna
Hydroelectric Proj ect on the selected wi ldlife species.
The information and conclusions contained in these reports are
incomplete and preliminary in nature and subject to change with
further study.Therefore,information contained in these reports
is not to be quoted or used in any publication without the
VITi tten permi ssion of the authors.
T'he reports are organized into the following 9 volumes:
r
Volume I.
Volume II.
Volume I II.
Volume IV.
Volume V.
Volume VI.
Volume VI I.
Volume VI I I.
Volume IX.
Big Game Summary Report
Moose -Downstream
Moose -Upstream
Caribou
Wolf
Black Bear and Brown Bear
Wolverine
Dall Sheep
Belukha Whale
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Downstream Moose
-
-
by R.Modafferi
Upstream Moose
by W.Ballard,J.S.Whitman,N.G.Tankersley,
L.D.Aumiller and P.Hessing .
Caribou
by K.W.·Pi tcher
Wolf
1
7
20
by W.B.Ballard,J.S.Whitman,L.D.Aumiller
and P.Hessing . . . . . . . . . . .30
:-
1
r
!
Black Bears and Brown Bears
by S.D.Miller
Wolverine
by J.S.Whitman and W.B.Ballard
Dall Sheep
by N.G.Tankersley . . . . . . .... . .
Belukha Whale
by D.G.Calkins
35
47
49
56
F"'"'
I Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59
.....iii
....
DOWNSTREAM MOOSE
Objectives of this study were to determine the probable nature
and approximate magnitude of impacts of the proposed Susi tna
River hydroelectric project on'moose (Alces alces gigas Miller)
in areas along the Susitna River downstream from the prospective
Devil Canyon dam site to Cook Inlet.To accomplish this objec-
t:ive,one must thoroughly understand how moose utilize habi tats
on the Susitna River floodplain.
This report is primarily based on data from relocations of
radio-collared moose collected between 15 October 1983 and
6 October 1984,and from supplemental moose censuses and surveys
conducted through March 1984,but also includes pertinent
findings from the Phase I study progress report (Arneson 1981)
and final report (Modafferi 1982)and a Phase II study progress
report (Modafferi 1983).
Since magnitude of use of winter range by Susitna River Valley
subpopulations of moose is partly related to severity of climatic
_conditions,findings presented in this report must be considered
as preliminary since sampling occurred and data were accumulated
during the relatively mild to average winters between 1979 and
1984.Though not severe,the variable nature of weather con-
ditions in the later two winters exhibited the influence snowfall
can have on moose behavior and winter use of the Susitna River
f:loodplain,and further substantiated the importance of this
concern.The 1982-83 winter was characterized by large amounts
of snowfall through December,followed by mild conditions and a
recession of snowcover by mid-January.The 1983-84 winter was
characterized by an early snowfall,continued extensive accumu-
lations of snowcover through February,and an abrupt amelioration
of conditions in early March.
In the mild winter of 1981-82,a maximum
observed in 6 censuses of floodplain habitats.
1
of 369 moose were
Maxima of 934 and
819 moose were observed in 11 and 7 similar censuses conducted in
winters of 1982-83 and 1983-84,respectively.Though within and
between year variation in moose use of floodplain habitats were
primarily associated with effects of winter weather conditions on
moose behavior,possible effects of winter mortality in 1982-83
on subsequent population levels in winter of 1983-84 and of other
factors,which historically may affect long term population
levels,should not be overlooked.
Data on patterns of movement,habitat use,productivity,survival
and identity of moose subpopulations ecologically affiliated with
the Susitna River,presented in this report,were primarily
synthesized from 3,184 relocations obtained from 10,29 and 18
moose captured'and radio-collared on 17 April 1980,10-12 March
1981 and 24 February to 10 March 1982,respectively,in flood-
plain habitats along the Susitna River between Devil Canyon and
Cook Inlet and subsequently radio-relocated through 3 October
1983.Five moose initially captured 17 April 1980,were recap-
tured 27 March 1983 and collared wi th new radio-transmi tters.
Radio-collared moose,were relocated at about biweekly intervals
through 16 March 1981 and about 10-day intervals from that time
through 3 October 1983.This schedule provided II,16,14,9,
and 9 relocation sites for most individuals monitored during the
'winter (1 January thru 28 February),calving (10 May thru 17
,June),summer ( 1 July thru 31 August),"hunting season"( 1
September thru 30 September)'and breeding (14 September thru 15
October)periods,respectively.These data illustrate where
impacts to subpopulations of moose which winter on the Susi tna
Ri ver floodplain wi 11 be realized d'\lring other seasonal periods.
l:vIost data collected from radio-collared individuals were analyzed
relative to these periods in moose life history.Variation due
-to sex of the individual,subpopulation and year were considered
in interpretive analyses.Radio-relocations from dates not
included in the life hi story periods above were grouped wi thin
spring,summer,autumn and post-breeding transi tory intervals.
2
-
r
'ro assess magnitude of seasonal and regional moose use of
riparian habitats along the Susitna River from to Devil Canyon to
Cook Inlet radio-relocation data were integrated with information
collected on 6,11 and 7 aerial censuses for moose conducted on
1the floodplain between 9 December 1981 and 12 April 1982 and
between 29 October 1982 and 22 February 1983,and between 17
November 1983 and 15 March 1984,respectively.
During the study period,a maximum of 934 moose were observed on
1:he lower Susi tna River floodplain,but other data,which demon-
strated that moose do not use the floodplain everyday wi thin a
'wdnter and that some moose do not use the floodplain every year,
suggested that this value may underestimate the true value by a
!!linimum of 41 percent.
Winter use of the Susitna River floodplain was greatest south of
Talkeetna.Highest moose densities were recorded for large
island areas near Cook Inlet.Age composition of observed moose
appeared related to habitat type;calves were most commonly
observed in low relief,relatively open floodplain habitats.For
the third consecutive year,female moose north of Talkeetna
exhibi ted an affinity for riparian habitats near the time of
parturi tion.Hypothetical explanations for these observations
are provided.
Radio-collared moose north of Talkeetna seldom ranged farther
t:han 8 km from riparian habi tats;moose south of Talkeetna
commonly ranged farther than 8 km from the Susi tna River and
relocations up to 40 kIn from floodplain areas were not uncommon
for the later area.Though moose north of Talkeetna did not
range far from riparian habitats,some did travel great di s-
t:ances,parallel to the river,during each annual cycle.
3
-I
I t
.,...
.-
Large variation between individuals and sexes wi thin years and
'within individuals and sexes between years was observed in
movements and sizes of ranges for radio-collared moose.Males
generally ranged over greater distances and larger areas than
females.Though many individual moose were found to range over
similar areas throughout three years of study,some individuals
continued to add different areas to their annual range each year.
Some data collected from radio-collared individuals suggested
jthat several moose subpopulations which may choose to winter in
jthe foothills of the Talkeetna Mountains,only seek winter range
<:m the Susi tna River floodplain when confronted with severe
winter condi tions in those alpine areas.
~~o more completely assess the relative importance of Susi tna
River floodplainhabi tats (vs.adj acent nonfloodplain habitats)
as winter range for moose subpopulations in the Susi tna River
Valley downstream from Devil,::anyon,studies on sites where
"natural"vegetation had been altered by activities of man
("disturbed"sites)were intensified.Winter moose surveys were
conducted in forested and riparian habitats adjacent to the
Susi tna River floodplain.These types of studies are of impor-
t:ance since mitigation actions may potentially involve selection
and procurement of lands (primarily nonfloodplain)and alteration
(enhancement)of habitats on those lands for the benefit of moose
populations.
Like the Susitna River floodplain,other riparian areas appeared
t:o be the most heavi ly used,nonfloodplain,winter range.How-
ever,some nonriparian,relatively open mixed forest habitats
aLiso appeared to support substantial numbers of wintering moose.
Dense extensive homogeneous forest habitats contained few moose.
Because of early spring movements of moose from floodplain areas
in 1984,it was not known if moose had occupied those habitats
all winter.These preliminary observations require further study
4
-
.....
,.....
,~
before nonfloodplain,forested habitats are altered as a mi ti-
gation action for moose habi tat enhancement.
Very dense concentrations of moose were observed at "disturbed"
si"tes.Data on timing and magnitude of their use by moose is
provided and their roles in interacting with Susitna River
floodplain winter range and in moose winter ecology are evalu-
ated.
One nonfloodplain alpine area in the southwE;!stern foothi lls of
the Talkeetna Mountains,which contained high densities of
wintering moose,was visited to determine what food sources were
attracting moose to the area.It was found that moose wintering
in thi s alpine area were "cratering"to feed on rhizomes and
immature fronds of ferns.Chemical composition of these non-
browse food items indicated they contained higher concentrations
of essential nutrients and lower concentrations of the less
digestible componpnts than apical shoots of browsed willows which
occurred in the same area.Ferns may be a critical food item for
moose which winter in simi lar alpine areas.
'To understand factors which may limit growth of moose subpopu-
lations associated with the lower Susitna River floodplain,data
on producti vi ty and calf survival were collected from radio-
collared moose.The latter data when supplemented with infor-
mation gathered during river censuses indicated that the moose
subpopulations studied had very high rates of productivity,the
calves probably sustained early summer predation by black bears
and that winter weather conditions affected both productivity and
calf survival.
Data available on present and historic moose p01lulation levels
were provided for areas along the Susitna River downstream from
Devil Canyon.Similar data must be considered in assessing the
potential value of the Susitna River floodplain habitats to
5
-
-
-
-
moose,since numbers of moose using those habitats are probably
relative to moose population levels and the latter can vary over
time.Likewi se,mitigation plans should not be limited to the
present status or use of habitats but more appropriately,they
sh"ould be based on the potential value of those habitats to
moose.
Probable and potential inadequacies of moose sampling effort in
thi s study are li sted and di scussed.
Preliminary considerations for reviewing,selecting,creating
and/or maintaining "enhanced"land areas for the benefit of moose
populations are summarized.
An annotated summary of potential impact mechanisms and their
associated effects is provided.General mechanisms considered
were the following:1)altered seasonal river flow patterns and
loss of annual variation in river flow,2)altered water temper-
ature,3)alteration of habitat,4)increased access,S)human
encroachment,6)increased railway and vehicular traffic,7)loss
Qf habitat at impoundment,8)saltwater encroachment at Cook
Inlet,9)altered turbidity and 10)altered ecosystem.
It was recommendated that research studies investigating:
1)moose use of "disturbed"sites;2)moose subpopulations north
of Talkeetna;3)moose use of nonfloodplain habitatsj 4)ecology
of floodplain areas where high moose densities occurred;
5)annual variation in moose movements and productivity;and
6)effects of "severe"winter weather conditions on moose use of
i:he Susi tna River floodplain,be continued.
6
--
I"""
i
I
UPSTREAM MOOSE
Analyses of movements of 10 adult cow moose radio-collared in a
proposed experimental burn area near the Alphabet Hill revealed
the presence of 3 subpopulations occupying the area--2 wintering
and 1 resident.An estimated 279 and 252 moose occupied the
proposed 47/000 acre burn area in 1982 and 1983 /respectively.
In fall 1982/22 adult radio-collared moose within the Susitna
Hydroelectric Study area were recaptured and recollared in an
E~ffort to continue movement and habitat use studies during
Phase I I.Home range sizes and movements of moose during the
reporting period were presented.During 1982/20 radio-collared
moose crossed the Susi tna River in the vicini ty of the impound-
ments a minimum of 42 occasions.Forty-nine percent of the
crossings were initiated during the months of January,February,
MaT and September.
Based upon locations of radio-collared moose which utilize the
impoundment,boundaries of impact zones were delineated.Zones
were classified as primary,secondary,and tertiary.The primary
zone included radio-collared moose which would be directly
i.mpacted by the project /whi le the secondary and terti ary zones
were comprised of moose home ranges which overlapped those in the
primary zone.Population estimates based on earlier censuses
ranged from approximately 1/900 to 2/600 moose which could be
directly impacted by the project.A census of the area in fall
1983 provided a moose population estimate of 2/836 ±301.Moose
occupied the impoundment areas more during the months of March-
iV[ay than other time periods.Two hundred and ninety /and 580
moose were estimated to inhabit the Watana impoundment area in
spring 1982 and 1983/respectively.Moose usage of the Watana
Impoundment zone was greatest during the month of March.
7
-
-
"""
Habitat use of radio-collared moose was assessed by overlapping
moose locations on preliminary vegetation maps.In relation to
availability,moose preferred woodland black spruce,open black
spruce,closed mixed forest,and woodland white spruce types.
Lakes,rock,sedge-grass tundra,sedge-shrub tundra and mat-
cushion tundra were not preferred.
For the Watana impoundment area on a year-round basis,elevations
ranging from 2001-2200 and 2401-3000 ft.were used more by
radio-collared moose while elevations ranging from 1201-1400 and
in excess of 3200 ft.were used significantly less,in relation
to availability.During winter and spring,elevations ranging
from 1601-2000 and 2201-2800 ft.were used more than expected.
Use of slopes and aspects were not random.
During the reporting period a moose population dynamics model was
developed and tested in an effort to predict population trends
under preproj ect conditions.Components of the preliminary model
are presented and discussed.Comparison of projected moose
population estimates based on modeling to those based on a 1983
census suggest that the model adequately represents moose popu-
lations dynamics under pre-project conditions.Eventually the
model will be used to test hypotheses concerning the impacts of
Susi tna Hydroelectric development on moose.
A summary of project impacts on moose and ways they may affect
basic population parameters are presented.
SECTION I.PROPOSED EXPERIMENTAL BURN
Preliminary movement analyses from 10 radio-collared moose
suggest that 3 separate populations utilize the proposed burn
areai (1)one population winters in the area and spends summer
and early fall north of the Alphabet Hills and the Denali High-
waYi (2)another subpopulation also winters in the area but
8
"""
....
-------------
migrates to the Oshetna River area where they remain through
spring,summer,and fall;and (3)The area is also inhabited by a
year-round resident population.
During the 1982 census,a total of 167 moose in 139 mi 2 were
counted.These were observed from fixed-wing aircraft at an
intensity of 5.2 min.jmi 2 •Based upon an intensive resurvey of 1
area which was randomly selected,we estimated that approximately
40%of the moose present had not been counted.Therefore,the
corrected March preburn moose population estimate in 1982 was 279
moose for a total density of 2.0 moosejmi 2 •Results of the 1983
census (196 moose observed)produced comparable total estimates:
279 moose in 1982 and 252 in 1983.Although tnore moose were
actually observed in 1983 than in 1982,the 1983 sightability
correction factor was much lower (I.29 in 1983 versus 1.67 in
1982).
SECTION II.H)ME RANGE,DISTRIBUTION AND MOVEMENTS OF MOOSE
ZONE OF IMPACT
Radio-collared moose which either seasonally or on a year-round
basis occupy areas to be directly altered by operation and main-
"tenance of both the Watana and Devil Canyon Impoundments were
used to delineate an area where moose would be directly impacted.
Home range polygons were determined for each moose which utilizes
either the impoundment or its facilities,and the outermost
borders of all polygons were used to delineate the border of the
primary impact zone (Fig.1).Home range polygons were computed
by connecting outermost point locations (Mohr 1947)and only for
those moose which had an excess of 4 location points.Similarly,
secondary and tertiary zones of impact were determined by using
the outer edges of moose home range polygons which overlap moose
which will be directly impacted.The latter two zones were
delineated on the assumption that moose displaced from the
primary zone will compete with moose occupying the secondary and
i:ertiary zones.
9
-
-o•-o...
Q"
~...-o•..
Cl-.,,-
:.o~:.•.-c:O<---.....~CO=•·04:4:-....~.!.
•.=,.
e,.
:.oe
c:ogo
",.
•-4
--00
-tita._e----=0:1.-.c:=•o e....
:.oct.....=-.:2:.
"e=-.":.oc:...-.e-.
"100c:~0_
0,
·0......~
:.0-
;eSo......a._-.o •
• 0
• 0
-;e
-"",.c:_
~.0=ClIoo
:~';:;-.~...ct_
~0
-I Q
~-
\
'-.
\
>\~.~I".:\
z'zl
III-~I".\
\.
-I~...
"~
~~"Ii.0<"i Ii.~
iIi.>i a::>>~a::Q <Ca::z<C 0 ~I ::I "a::ii lU lU
~tOO ~
·ID~I .
10
-
....
The primary impact zone was censused in fall 1983 using quadrant
sampling techniques (Gasaway et a/.1982)in an effort to refine
earlier moose population estimates.Boundaries of individual
sample areas were identical to those used during the fall 1980
census and therefore the area censused did not conform exactly to
the boundaries of the impact zone which were based on movements
of radio-collared moose.Table 6 of the report summarizes the
results of the fall 1983 census of the primary moos~impact zone.
Average moose densities in the area ranged from 0.6 moose/mi 2 in
low density stratum to 3.5 moose/mi 2 in high density areas.The
total fall population was estimated at 2,836 ±301 moose.
Table 7 of the report compares 4 separate population estimates
(3 based on 1980 census data and 1 based on 1983 census data)of
the numbers of moose occupying the primary impact zone.The
first method was similar to the preliminary analysis provided by
Ballard et a/.(1982).The proportion of radio-collared moose
occurring within the impoundment zone was compared to the total
number of radio-collared moose wi thin the 1980 census boundary
and was then extrapolated to the total population estimate.
Ai though such an estimate (1,913 moose)could have potentially
been biased because of capture location,over half of the radio-
collared moose included in the method were captured for other
studies,and thus were located away from the project area.
Therefore,any biases should have been minimized.Method 2
applied the average moose density estimate derived from censusing
moose count areas 7 and 14 during fall 1980 (see Ballard et a/.
1982)to the amount of moose habitat contained within the primary
zone.Method 3 utilized the actual count area boundaries used
for the 1980 census.Each count area had been stratified into
one of 4 moose densities (none,low,medium,and high)and its
area had been determined.The moose density estimates for each
stratum in 1980 were then applied to the amount of each type
occurring wi thin the primary zone.Method 4 consi sted of the
actual 1983 census estimate.
11
-
The most recent census provided the largest estimate of moose
occupying the impact zone.This was not particularly surprising
since moose modeling exercises (see Moose Population Modeling)
suggest the moose population has increased since 1980.Also,the
ea"rlier estimates were based on extrapolations of 1980 census
data and not direct counts of the area.
Using methods similar to those of method #2 we have estimated
that there are approximately 23,000 moose in GMU-13.Therefore,
over 10%of the moose in the Unit could be directly affected by
the proposal proj ect.
v.lINTER USE OF THE IMPACT ZONE
Winter locations of moose found within the impact zone were used
to delineate the approximate boundaries of an area which should
be intensively censused during severe winter conditions in future
years.
Because moose appeared to concentrate in the Watana impoundment
area during March in both 1982 and 1983,an attempt was made to
census the Watana impoundment area out to 1/4 mile from the 2,200
ft.high pool level.The 1982 census was conducted on 25 March
and the 1983 census was conducted on 28 March.Conditions for
both censuses were poor due to complete but old snow cover,
overcast light conditions~and moderate air turbulence.No
census was conducted in the Devil Canyon area during 1982.
Watana Impoundment
A total of 4.4 (2.73 min/mi 2 )and 6.6 (4.09 min/mi 2 )hours were
spent surveying 96.8 mi 2 of habitat (river water area excluded)
in the proposed Watana Impoundment area during 1982 and 1983,
respectively.A sightabili ty correction factor obtained from
censusing the proposed Alphabet Hills burn area in 1982 was
12
....
utilized which resulted in a population estimate of 290 moose in
1982.The latter estimate was 7 times greater than the number of
moose which were estimated wi thin the same area in March 1981
(Ballard et m.1982).However,in 1983 3.4 mi 2 of the Impound-
ment area was randomly selected and recensused at an intensity of
12 minutes/mi 2 in an effort to estimate the number of moose
mi ssed during the less intensive survey.The more intensive
search research resulted in a si~htability correction factor of
.2.6 which when applied to the numbers of moose observed during
the less intensive count (161 moose)provided a total 1983
population estimate of 580 moose.The relatively high correction
factor in 1983 was also substantiated by our observing only 2 of
7 radio-colla'red moose known to be present -in the impoundment
area during the count.
From 14 February through 24 May 1983,30 radio-collared moose
which have a history of utilizing the impoundment areas during
some portions of the year (Ballard et al.1982)we.'-'e located
"twice weekly to determine habitat use and to estimate the pro-
portion of time these moose utilized the area to be inundated.
By 25 January 1983,20%of the intensively monitored moose were
in the impoundments.Use of the impoundment areas increased in
March when approximately one-third of the intensively monitored
moose were in the impoundment zone.Use declined after March and
by mid-May only 7-10%of the moose were located wi thin the
impoundment.
Annual moose usage by month of rhe Watana impoundment zone from
1981-1983 is depicted in Figure 5 of the report.During March of
each year,33 to 48%of the locations of radio-collared moose
were in areas which would be inundated by the Watana impoundment.
13
----~---------
.....
Devi 1 Canyon Impoundment
On 31 March 1983,a total of 2.1 hours (4.1 minjmi 2 )was spent
censusing a 30 mi 2 area within ~of the high pool level of the
Devil Canyon Impoundment.A total of 14 moose were observed.A
1.7 mi 2 area was recounted at an intensity of 12.4 minjmi 2 in an
effort to generate a sightabi li ty correction factor.No addi-
tional moose were recounted,however only 1 of 2 radio-collared
moose known to be wi thin the area was observed during the less
intensive count.Even if half the moose were missed however,the
counts indicate that the Devil Canyon Impoundment area is poorer
moose habitat than that found in the Watana Impoundment.Only 2
moose were observed in a similar cen~us of the area in March 1981
(Ballard et al.1982).
SECTION I I I.USE OF HABITATS,ELEVATIONS,SLOPES AND ASPECTS
Based on a preliminary assessment,the following habitat types
were preferred in relation to their avai labili ty by moose both
year-round and in spring:woodland black spruce,open black
spruce,closed mixed forest and woodland white spruce.Willow
habitat types were preferred when ecotones were included but were
not selected out of proportion to their availability when eco-
tones were excluded.During spring,willow habitat types were
used proportionally less than their availability.Also,low
shrub habi tat types were used year-round in excess of their
availability when ecotone areas were excluded.Lakes,rock,
sedge-grass tundra,sedge-shrub tundra,and mat-cushion tundra
were generally used less than expected based upon their avail-
abili ty.Generally,the remaining vegetation types not li sted
above were used in proportion to their abundance.Because
corrected updated vegetation maps are currently in preparation
and only moose locations obtained from April 1980 to September
1981 were included,all conclusions based upon this analysis are
preliminary.
14
There was considerable variation in the monthly and annual
elevations occupied by radio-collared moose in the primary impact
,~zone.Generally,moose in the project area move to higher
elevations in October,presumably to breed,and then depending on
snow conditions,begin moving downward reaching the lowest eleva-
tions occupied during the year from January through May.Moose
appear to be driven to lower elevations in winter by heavy
snowfall;however,we suspect that in average or mild winters,
temperature inversions and high winds make foraging and traveling
easier at higher elevations.Consequently,moose may occupy
relati vely high areas in winter and spring depending on snow
depths,temperatures,and other factors.Moose occupy lower
elevations in late spring and early summer during calving.This
may be related to earlier snow melt,earlier growth of spring
forage,and perhaps increased cover requirements during calving .
....
The monthly importance of elevations at or below 2,300 ft.to
moose wi thin the primary impact zone was quite variable between
years except during winter and spring months.Use during at
least 1 month each winter and spring exceeded 30%of the loca-
tions.As expected,use of the impoundment zone by moose was
lowest during the months of October through December.Overall,
21.4%of all moose locations collected from October 1976 through
May 1982 were at or less than 2,300 ft.elevation.
Wa tana Impoundment
....
Elevations rangi ng from 2,001-2,200 and 2,401-3,000 ft.wi thin
the primary impact zone of the Watana impoundment were used more
than expected (P <0.05)based upon availability,while elevations
from 1,201-1,400 ft.and in excess of 3,204 ft.were used less
(P <0.05)than expected.Elevations ranging from 1,40}-2,OOO,
2,201-2,400,and 3,001-3,200 ft.were used in proportion to their
availability (P lO.05).During winter and spring,elevations
ranging from 1,601-2,000,and 2,201-2,800 ft.were used more than
15
expected (P (0.05),reflecting the downward movement·of moose
during these seasons.Elevations in excess of 3,001 ft.were
used less than expected (P <0.05)during winter and spring
seasons.
Similarly,slope usage by moose was not random (P <0.05),X 2 =
24.5).Flat slopes were used less than expected (P <0.05)while
moderate slopes were used more than expected (P <0.05),both
year-round and from January to May.Gentle slopes were used in
proportion to their availability.
South slopes were used more than expected (X 2 =21.65,P <0.05)
while flat slopes were used less than expected (X 2 =22.9,
P <0.05).All other aspect categories were used in proportion to
their availability (P >0.05).A similar situation also existed
during winter and spring months (X 2 =63.97,P <0.005)except that
southwest slopes were used more than expected (P <0.05,X 2 =
4.05).
Devi 1 Canyon
Elevations ranging from 1,601 to 2,400 ft.were used relatively
more by moose both year-round and during January to May
(P <0.05),while:those in excess of 2,800 ft were used either
significantly less than expected (P <0.05)or in proportion to
their occurrence.However,area with elevations to be inundated
by the Devil Canyon impoundment were used in proportion to their
availability.
Moose occupying the Devil Canyon area used both south and south-
west facing slopes more than expected (P <0.05)based upon
availabi Ii ty.North facing slopes were used le2s than expected
~
(P <0.05),while all other slope categories were used in pro-
portion to their occurrence.
16
Both year-round and during January to May flat slopes were used
less than expected (P <0.05)while moderate slopes were used more
than expected (P <0.05).During January to May gentle slopes
were used in proportion to their occurrence (P <0.05),but
year-round they were used more than expected (P <0.05).
SECTION IV.MOOSE POPULATION MODELING
In an attempt to identify additional mechanisms of project impact
and to quantify impacts previously identified by Ballard et 01.
(1982),a multidisciplinary model is currently being developed
for moose.This segment of the report presents our progress in
developing a satisfactory moose population model for pre-project
conditions.Because longer,more intense moose population
studies to assess the impacts of predation on moose were pre-
viously conducted in an adj acent portion of GMU 13 (Ballard
et 01.1981 a,b),that area was used as the basis for this
particular model.Boundaries of the area were prev~ously
described by Ballard et m.(1981a).Briefly,the boundaries are
the Alaska Range on the north,Brushkana and Deadman Creeks on
the west,Susi tna River on the south and the Maclaren River on
the east.Although this area extends beyond the impact zones,we
believe that the biological characteristics of the area are
representative of the project area.Also,an attempt was made to
model the entire GMU 13 moose population as well,in an effort to
provide a comparison to the Susitna model and allow assessment of
the percentage of the GMU 13 moose population to be impacted by
the project.Both models will be published elsewhere (Ballard
et 01.In Prep.).
These population models start with an estimate of population
size,and sex and age structure,and proceed through an annual
cycle of reproduction and mortality factors.Population esti-
mates are calculated for each year at calving and subsequently
the population declines as mortality factors act on the popula-
tion.
17
-
-
SECTION V.IMPACT MECHANISMS
Table 1 summarizes the major structural features associated with
the construction and operation of the Susitna Hydroelectric
Project and a description of their potential impact on moose.In
an effort to assess the effects of these impacts on moose,they
were related to the basic components of the moose model described
in the report.Based upon this assessment,the proposed project
will affect the population dynamics of upper Susitna moose and
their predators.The exact magnitude of these effects,however,
will require refinement as studies proceed and actual operation
is commenced.Earlier (see section on Zone of Impact)we esti-
mated that based upon numbers of radio-collared moose utilizing
the impoundment areas in relation to the 1980 census,from 1900
to 2600 moose could be directly impacted by construction and
operation of the Watana and Devil Canyon impoundments.These
estimates comprised 8 to 11%of the total numbers of moose
occurring in GMU-13.Including moose which could be secondarily
impacted by the project through increased competition from
di splaced moose,etc.,approximately 45%of the GMU-13 moose
population could be affected to varying degrees by the proposed
projects.Moose modeling efforts currently underway will be
adapted to incorporate anticipated effects of the project on the
individual components of the moose population.
SECTION VI.MITIGATION
Current investigation is focused on an experimental burn to
improve moose habi tat described in Section I.
18
TaDle 1.Su1tDa HydroelectriC Project actions and their ~tential .ffec:t on IIOOse
tlUIItlers,disuUlution and haDitat 1n the Sus1tna River ArM.
--
.....
I
PrOject Action
Construction and o{)eraUon
of das (staqinq loae,
cups,mel st:ucturesl
Spoil sit.s
Borro"areas
Reservoir clearinq
Penumeat villaqe faclliUu
!'!a1n and accessory roads and
railroads.
Airstrtptl
'l'rUlSll1ssioa line construction,
access and operation
F1l1 and operatioa of
impoundments
Envircmantal Effect
Lotls of winter r!U1qe.
Avo1dance of adjacent winter ranqe.
Lotls of spr1nq-SWIIlI8r raDqe.
Avoidance of Silr1nq-suaer ranqe.
Possible 1JIpedenc:e to II1qration.
TeI!POrary loss of w1uter-sua,er ranqe.
Te.porary avoidance of adjacent habitat.
PftmaDeat and taporuy loss of winter babitat.
PerluDent and teaQOrary loss of spr1nq-SUIDIr habitat.
THpOruy avoidance of habitat.
La!IS of habitat.
Tesporary avoidance of adjacent areas.
Loss of haDitat.
AvoidaDCe of adjacent areas.
Loa of"haDitat.
Pentanent and temporary avoidanc:e (disturbeDcel
of adjacent habitat.
Mortality frOta collisions.
Increased hwDaD-related IIIDrtality Ullmtinq,
defense of life,etc.).
Increase4 cOIIIIIl8rd.al and recreatioaal develoPllleDt
on adjacent landS.
Loss of habitat.
TeI!POrary avoidaJ:lce (d1sturtlanc:e)of adjacent areas.
Increased huun access and human-related IIIOrtal1ty.
Tuporuy avoidance of habitat.
Increased acceStI.-
Te-po1"UY loss of habitat•.
!nntual SUlIIIIer habitat improvement.
Potential for increased coaaerc:1al and recreational
davelo~t
PeDlaDent inundation of wiater ranqe.
Peaaoent 1Dundat1on of sprinq-SUllllDer ranqe.
Increased snow depths on adjacent area.
I%lcrease4 snow drHtiaq on adjacent areas.
Id.Dq CD veqetation dU8 to open water.
Impedence of lIIOvements due to open water dur1nq
subfreednq t~eratures.
Increased IIIOrtality frQll,attespt1nq to cross tb1n ice.
~enc:e of lIIDVelleDts and 1Dc:reased IIOrtali ty due
to ice sbelv1nq•
Increased IIIOrtality cross1nq mud flats.
OnstaDle slopes causinq habitat loss.
Crovdiaq on adjacent habitat.
Increased humaa access.
Decreased vegetation productivity on adjacent lands
due to cl1ll&t1c chanqes.
19
.-
CARIBOU
The Nelchina caribou herd,found primarily in the large basin
formed by the upper drainages of the Susitna and Copper Rivers,
and surrounded by four mountain ranges,the Wrangell Mountains,
the Talkeetna Mountains,the Alaska Range and the Chugach Moun-
tains,has been an important wildlife resource because of its
size and proximity to the majority of the state's human popula-
tion.Between 1954 and 1983 in excess of 100,000 caribou were
harvested from this herd.In 1983,9,715 people applied for
-
-
,....
1,750 permi ts to hunt for Nelchina caribou.
Plans to construct a large hydroelectric project on the Susitna
River·wi thin the western reaches of the Nelchina caribou range
have rai sed concerns about impacts of the development on thi s
important caribou herd.Impact studies were started in early
1980 and a comprehensive report on the results published in March
1982 (Pitcher 1982).Considerable background material was also
presented in that report;primarily historical range use,move-
ment patterns and population levels.In April 1983,a progress
report was distributed updating research results (Pitcher 1983).
Following is a summary of background material,methodology,
resul ts,possible impacts and recommendations from that report.
Plans to construct a large hydroelectric project
on the Susitna River within the western portion of
the Nelchina caribou range have rai sed concerns
about the welfare of this important caribou herd.
Impact studies,whi-ch began in early 1980,con-
tinue with the basic objectives of monitoring herd
status,determining range use and migratory routes
and delineating subherds.The results of these
studies are being used to evaluate potential
impacts of proj ect construction,to make recom-
mendations to minimize adverse impacts and to
evaluate mitigation measures.Extensive use of
historical records of the Nelchina herd has been
made in the analyses because of the changeable
nature of caribou movement patterns.
20
-
-
-
During the winters of 1980-81 and 1981-82,the
main Nelchina herd wintered primarily on the
northeastern Lake Louise Flat eastward through the
middle portion of the Gakona and Chistochina River
drainages to Slana.
During spring migration females moved across the
Lake Louise Flat onto the calving grounds in the
eastern Talkeetna Mountains on a broad front from
Lone Butte to Kosina Creek.Significant numbers
of female caribou (probably over 50%in 1982)
passed through the upper Watana impoundment area
enroute to the calving grounds.Most males
remained on winter range during this period.
Calving occurred primarily in drainages of Kosina
Creek although some occurred along Goose Creek and
the lower reaches of the Black and Oshetna Rivers.
Nelchina bulls were found scattered throughout the
Nelchina range during this time mostly in transit
to summer range.
Summer range for Nelchina females was the northern
and eastern slopes of the Talkeetna Mountains.
Bulls were scattered in "bull pastures"throughout
the high country of the Nelchina range.
During autumn considerable dispersal occurred from
the Talkeetna Mountains across the Lake Louise
Flat.In 1982,perhaps 10%of the female segment
crossed the Susitna River and moved onto the Jay
Creek-Coal Creek plateau.
During the rut the herd appeared to be well mixed
and moved eastward across the Lake Louise Flat.
In mid-October 1982 about 10%of the herd crossed
the Susi tna River in the area of Watana Creek,
migrated across the Jay Creek-Coal Creek plateau
and moved eastward to winter range.
Historically,Nelchina caribou have used the same
calving grounds however considerable variation in
summer and winter range use has been noted.Mig-
ratory routes,although somewhat traditional,have
varied depending on the geographic relationship of
the calving grounds to summer and winter ranges.
The Nelchina herd was estimated to contain 18,713
caribou in October 1980,20,730 in 1981 and 21,162
in 1982.Herd composition in October 1982 was
estimated at 47.7%females ~1 year,26.5%males ~1
year and 25.8%calves.
21
.....
....
Calf survival from birth to 10.5 months of age was
estimated at 0.58.Average annual survival for
caribou ~1 year was estimated at 0.88 for females
and 0.92 for males (0.89 sexes combined).Re-
ported hunter kill of Nelchina caribou for the
1981-82 regulatory year was 863 animals.
Observations of radio-collared (and non-collared)
caribou indicated the existence of a discrete
subherd resident in the upper drainages of the
Susitna,Nenana and Chulitna Rivers (upper
Susitna-Nenana subherd).Although overlap with
animals from the main Nelchina herd occurred
during winter,summer and fall,females were
separated during calving.An initial census
(direct count)of thi s subherd was attempted in
October 1982 and 2,077 caribou were counted.
Complications in evaluating the count resulting
from delays from weather and movement of mainherd
animals through the area make it desirable to
repeat the census .
It is apparent,even though the massive crossings
of the Susitna River in the area of Watana Creek
have not occurred in recent years,that signifi-
cant numbers of Nelchina caribou migrate through
the upper portion of the proposed Watana impound-
ment.This occurs during both spring and fall.
While it is not possible to predict the impacts of
the Watana impoundment on migrating caribou it
does appear that the greatest potential for dele-
terious impacts occurs during spring migration to
the calving grounds.Pregnant females are often
in the poorest condition of the year at this time
and might be particularly vulnerable to an ex-
tended migration or a hazardous reservoir cros-
sing.The proposed Denali access road passes
through the range of the upper Susitna-Nenana
subherd and historical summer and winter range of
the main Nelchina herd.Potential impacts include
increased mortality from vehicle collisions,
impeded east-west movements,increased hunter
access and possibly increased predation.
The Susitna hydroelectric project should be viewed
as one of a number of probable developments which
wi 11 occur on the Nelchina caribou range.Whi le
no one action may have catastrophic results the
cumulative impact will likely be a reduced ability
for the Nelchina range to support large numbers of
caribou.
22
,...
It is recommended that range use and migratory
routes be monitored by periodic relocations of
radio-collared caribou.Population status should
be monitored with annual censuses and sex and age
composi tion sampling.Increased emphasi s should
be placed on studying the upper Susi tna-Nenana
subherd.
The remainder of this report deals,mainly,with findings
obtained since preparation of the l~st progress report (November
1982-0ctober 1983)and a discussion of the significance of these
findings to proj ect construction.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Migratory barriers:both the proposed impoundments and asso-
ciated transportation corridors are potential barriers to the
free migration of Nelchina caribou between components of their
range.The Devil Canyon impoundment and transportation routes to
the west linking with the Parks Highway or the Alaska Railroad do
not appear to be of serious concern as neither currently nor
historically.have many caribou occurred in this region.In
contrast,the Watana impoundment area was crossed regularly by
the entire female-calf segment of the Nelchina herd during many
years between 1950 and 1973 moving from the calving grounds to
summer .range north of the Susi tna River (Skoog 1968,Hemming
1971,Bos 1974).This movement sometimes occurred in June after
calving but more commonly took place in late July (Skoog 1968).
Hemming (1971)stated that most crossings of the Susitna in the
proposed impoundment area occurred between Deadman Creek and the
big bend of the Susi tna.Varying proportions of the herd have
also wintered north of the impoundment area in drainages of the
upper Susitna,Nenana and Chulitna Rivers in many years.Between
1957 and 1964 this was the major wintering area (Hemming 1971).
Spring migration to the calving grounds crossed the impoundment
area primarily between Deadman Creek and Jay Creek.
23
....
..-
Massive movements of caribou across the proposed Watana impound-
ment have not occurred during the study period,nor have they
been recorded since about 1976 (S.Eide,pers.commun.).Based
on repetitive relocations of radio-collared caribou during this
study it seemed that low to moderate level movements through the
upper Watana impoundment area occurred during spring migration
from the Lake Louise Flat to the Talkeetna Mountains.The main
area utilized was the big bend of the Susitna near the confluence
of the Oshetna River although some crossings took place downriver
near the mouth of Watana Creek.During spring 1981 it appeared
both from relocations of radio-collared animals and sightings of
tracks and animals that many animals were using the frozen
Susitna River as a travel route.They apparently traveled on the
Susi tna from the Tyone and Oshetna Rivers to Kosina Creek and
Watana Lake where they moved west into the Talkeetna Mountain
foothills.During autumn dispersal about 10%of the herd has
annually passed through the Watana impoundment area as they moved
out of summer range in the Talkeetna Mountains.In mid-October
~982 perhaps 10%of the herd crossed the Susitna (south to north)
in the area of Watana Creek.It is quite clear that the proposed
Watana impoundment intersects a major migratory route which was
intensively used in the past and currently receives low to
moderate use.It is expected that one day Nelchina caribou will
again use summer and winter ranges north of the impoundment area
and therefore will again resume massive crossings of the proposed
Watana impoundment area.
The proposed Denali access road from the Denali Highway to the
Watana darn site neatly bisects summer and winter range for up to
50%of the upper Susitna-Nenana subherd.Relocations of radio-
collared caribou indicate that the Chulitna Mountains are impor-
tant calving and summer range and that most animals which summer
in the area move to the east for the winter.Thus perhaps up to
half of this subherd would be exposed to problems associated with
road crossings in a treeless area twice a year.Some calving
24
.....
.-.
occurs in the vicinity of the proposed access road.However,
because calving females from this subherd do not congregate on a
discrete calving ground but rather calve while dispersed over a
large area it is probably impossible to route the Denali access
ro"ad to completely avoid calving females.Conversely only.a
small amount of calving would occur wherever the road is con-
structed.Resumption of use of summer and winter range north of
the proposed impoundments would put the main Nelchina herd in
contact with the Denali access road and would require crossings
in order to reach and return from summer range in the Chulitna
Mountains.
Studies and observations on the reactions of caribou to highways
and vehicles are somewhat contradictory although most biologists
agree that highways particularly those in open terrain with heavy
vehicular traffic inhibit to some degree the free movement of
caribou (Cameron et al.1979,Horejsi 1981,Klein 1971).Sever-
i ty of impacts of roads and traffic on caribou are unknown btlt
undoubtedly vary depending on the local situation.Nelchina
caribou continue to cross the Richardson Highway often in large
numbers,and have done so during many years since about 1960
(Hemming 1971).The area where the Richardson crossings take
place is timbered in contrast to the open tundra and shrublands
of the proposed Denali access route.Nelchina caribou also cross
the Glenn Highway (primari ly the Tok-Cutoff),Denali Highway,
Lake Louise Road and Nabesna Road on occasion.The Glenn Highway
and Nabesna Road are crossed twice yearly during those years
(perhaps half of recent years)when the Nelchina herd winters in
the Wrangell Mountains-Mentasta Mountains area.Small numbers of
caribou,primarily bulls,cross the Glenn Highway west of
Glennallen during winter and spring each year.Most years small
numbers of caribou cross the Lake Louise Road during the autum~
dispersal period.
25
Direct Mortality:attempted movements of caribou across the
Watana impoundment could result in increased mortality.Spring
migration from winter range to the calving grounds in the
Talkeetna Mountain foothills would occur from late April to
mid-May.Thi s would be a period of transition from an ice-
covered reservoir at maximum drawdown with probable ice shelving
and ice-covered shores to an open reservoir filling from spring
run-off ..Post-calving movements from the calving grounds to
summer range north of the Susitna would occur in late June or
July at which time the impoundment would be ice free and nearing
maximum water level.Additional movements from August into
October would likely occur but would probably involve smaller,
dispersed groups of animals.At this time the impoundment would
be at maximum water level and ice free.
Spring migration appears to hold the greatest potential for
increased mortality.Pregnant females are in the poorest condi-
tion of the annual cycle at this time (Skoog 1968)ani migratory
barriers which normally would be easily circumvented could become
significant mortality factors.Ice covered shores,ice sheets
and steep ice shelves formed by winter drawdown of the reservoir
could present hazardous obstacles to movement (Hanscom and
Osterkamp 1980).Skoog (1968)mentioned several instances of
injuries and death resulting from falls on or through ice.Both
Klein (1971)and Vilmo (1975)mention ice shelving as a mortality
-"factor of reindeer on reservoirs in Scandanavia.
Crossings during summer and fall when the reservoir would be ice
free appear to pose considerably less hazard.Caribou are
excellent swimmers and are known to cross much larger bodies of
-water than the proposed impoundment (Skoog 1968).Young calves
might have problems with this distance if migration,,;occurred-shortly after calving.Water crossings have been reported as
mortali ty factors but usually involved rivers rather than more
placid bodies of water such as a reservoir (Skoog 1968).
Banfield and Jakimchuk (1980)suggested that open water posed a
26
-
barrier,particularly during post-calving movements and mid-
summer migration.Large lakes are often crossed at traditional
si tes,often narrow points.or where islands provide interim
stopping points.They state "caribou prefer to avoid open
water.II Rafts of floating debris could cause problems for the
first few years after filling the impoundment.Mortali ties of
moose which could not reach shore because of floating debris have
been reported in reservoirs in Canada (W.Ballard,pers.
commun.) .
Some mortality of caribou from collisions with vehicles along the
Denali access road may occur,although caribou-vehicle collisions
at other highway crossings are infrequent.Number of mortalities
will largely depend on the presence or absence of the main
Nelchina herd in the area.Wolf predation may increase as wolves
have been found to use roads to their advantage when hunting
caribou (Robey 1978).
Loss of Habi tat:thi sis not a serious problem as the proposed
developments (impoundments,access corridors,borrow pits and
settlements)are a small portion of total caribou habitat in the
Nelchina range and are generally of poor quali ty.
Increased Human Access:project development would likely in-
crease human access to the Nelchina herd calVing grounds and
summer range in the Talkeetna Mountains.The calving grounds are
currently in one of the most remote and inaccessible regions
within the Nelchina range.Increased human activity and develop-
ment would likely occur which have been shown to adversely impact
caribou use of calving areas.Cameron et 01.(1979)documented
abandonment of a portion of the calving grounds of the central
Arctic herd concurrent with development of the Prudhoe Bay oil
fields.
27
The Denali access road would also increase access to important
caribou habitat which is currently used primarily by the upper
Susi tna-Nenana subherd.The area has in the past and probably
will again be an important summer and winter use area of the
Nelchina herd.
Concern has been expressed that increased hunter access provided
by project development could result in excessive hunter harvest.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game regulatory procedures should
be.adequate to prevent this from happening.Illegal kills could
increase with additional access.
Reduced Condition:should migratory barriers cause extended or
more difficult migrations,particularly during spring migration
to the calving grounds when pregnant females are in the poorest
condition of their annual cycle (Skoog 1968),the population
dynamics of the herd could be impacted.Mortality rates of adult
animals c.:>Uld be increased while viability of newborn calves
could be decreased.
Increased human activity particularly in the form of aircraft and
vehicular traffic could result in chronic,higher levels of
disturbance causing lowered physical condition.Several studies
(Miller-and Gunn 1979,Calef et a/.1976)have recorded responses
of caribou to aircraft disturbance and speculated on deleterious
impacts.Cows and calves were most responsive to di sturbance
(Miller and Gunn 1979).Caribou show the greatest sensitivity
during the rut and calving (Calef et a/.1976).
Cumulati ve Impacts:perhaps the maj or impact of the Susi tna
hydroelectric development on the Nelchina caribou herd will be a
contribution towards gradual,lo~g term cumulative habitat
degradation rather than immediate,severe impacts.The proposed
hydroelectric project is only one (although the major one)of a
number of developments which may occur on the Nelchina range.
Considerable mining activity already is taking place in the
28
______...=_T"7_~__.,._
!'''''
southeastern Talkeetna Mountains,traditional summer range.A
state oil and gas lease sale is planned for the Lake Louise Flat,
a major wintering area.The Bureau of Land Management is plan-
ning to open much of the Nelchina Basin to oil exploration.
Considerable land is passing from public to private ownership
through the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and through state
land disposal programs.While no single action may have a
catastrophic impact it seems likely that long-term cumulative
impacts will result in a lessened ability for the Nelchina range
to support large numbers of caribou.Habitat destruction,
increased access and human activity,disturbance,and barriers to
free movement will all probably contribute to thi s.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONTINUING STUDIES
Herd population status should be monitored with annual censuses
and sex and age composition sampling.Range use and migration
routes,particularly in the general area of the proposed develop-
ments,should be documented by maintaining and monitoring a pool
of radio-collared caribou from the main Nelchina herd.Up to 10
radio-collared caribou should be monitored in the upper Susitna-
Nenana subherd to document range use and seasonal movements,
particularly in the area of the proposed access road and proposed
impoundments and associated developments.Another census of the
upper Susi tna-Nenana subherd should be attempted in order to
generate a more reliable estimate of population size.
29
-
WOLF
During 1982 and 1983 wolf studies were continued in the Susitna
River Basin to investigate potential impacts of the proposed
Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Between 1 November 1981 and
31 December 1983,42 wolves were captured and outfitted with
transmi tter-equipped collars to enable researchers to document
movements,denning and rendezvous locations,habitat use,and
food habits.Throughout the period,a total of 13 packs and
1 lone wolf were known to be using areas in or adj acent to the
Devil Canyon or Watana impoundment zones.During any particular
year 5-6 individual wolf packs used areas to be inundated by the
proposed project.Six hundred forty-nine radio locations yielded
945 wolf sightings upon which this report is based.Individual
pack histories are presented .
.Territory sizes of 7 intensively monitored packs ranged from 127
mi 2 to 602 mi 2 (329 km 2 to 1559 km 2 ),and averaged 452 mi 2 (1,171
km 2 )in 1982 and 1983.Territory sizes varied considerably among
'packs,probably due to pack size,prey densities,frequency of
moni toring,and adj acent pack boundaries.
Distribution of wolf packs is suspected to be virtually complete
in the basin,with elevational use generally restricted to less
than 4,000 ft.Elevational distribution varies seasonally and is
probably dependent on relative densities of maj or prey.Both
moose and wolves used lowest annual elevations in February,with
a general increase in elevational use until October wi th sub-
sequent declines thereafter.
Analyses of food habits of wolves were based largely on aerial
observations of wolves at kills.Moose of all age classes
represented 61%of the diet,with caribou comprising 30%.
Analysis of 1982 scat collections supported conclusions drawn
from aerial observations.
30
-
Probably the most important impact on wolves resulting from the
proposed project will be lowering of wintering densities of
primary prey species (moose and caribou)in the impoundment zone,
with resultant declines in wolf numbers.Secondly,loss of
habitat through inundation and facilities development will
undoubtedly force wolves to readjust territory boundaries
resulting in intra-specific strife.This will affect not only
wolf packs presently in the basin (especially the Watana pack),
but also packs far removed from the area.
IMPACTS
Impacts of the proposed impoundments and their associated borrow
pits,transmission corridors,work camps and facilities are
difficult to quantify at this time.However,based on earlier
research and that reported herein,some impacts can be estimated.
Probably the most significant impact the impoundments will have
on wolves will result from a change in population density,
di stribution,sex and age composition and/or physical condi tion
of moose and caribou.The majority of the wolf's diet in this
area is moose,and any decrease in prey numbers will probably be
reflected in both wolf density and distribution.Ballard et 0/.
(1984)estimated that approximately 2,800 moose could be directly
impacted by the impoundments.During the impoundment filling
stage and for at least 1 year following inundation,there will
probably be an increase in wolf numbers in response to higher
concentrations of moose adjacent to the impoundments.There will
be a high number of displaced moose which will be concentrated
adjacent to the reservoirs due to the decreased availability of
usable habitat.However,the duration of this relatively high
moose concentration will probably be short,i.e.2-3 years.
After that,deterioration of the habitat will undoubtedly result
in relatively lower moose numbers.Ultimately,0 remaining wolves
and the area's ability to support larger numbers will be reduced,
31
....
.....
but for a short period they will remain relatively high and
further depress the moose population and possibly prevent it from
increasing.
Access roads and the proposed permanent village for project
personnel will result in a significant increase in human use of
the area.Correspondingly,there will probably be a higher
incidence of hunting,trapping and accidental mortality upon
wolves.Indirect effects upon wolves resulting from higher human
populations will probably also occur.Activity near den and
rendezvous sites in early summer will certainly disrupt,and in
some cases,will probably cause wolves to abandon den and feeding
si tes.Den site abandonment could lead to higher pup mortali ty.
Inundation of den and rendezvous sites,travel corridors and
hunting/feeding areas will eliminate portions of wolf terri-
tories.Loss of this habi tat will force wolves to readjust
territory boundaries and will probably result in increased inter-
pack strife.Since present wolf mortality from some of the packs
adjacent to the Susitna River are low (Watana Pack in particular)
with subsequent high dispersals to surrounding areas,this area
acts as a reservoir in supplying wolves to adjacent areas.
Should mortality within these packs increase,there will probably
be less dispersal away from the area.Consequently,the reduc-
tion of wolf numbers adjacent to the impoundments may well affect
not only those packs immediately adjacent to the river,but also
packs far removed from the area.Movements of over 50 miles
(80 km)away from the Watana territory by wolves which either
joined new packs or ini tiated new packs have been recorded.
Of the 6 packs which will be impacted by the proposed project,
the Watana pack will be one of the packs to be impacted most
severely.The effects of habitat inundation on the Watana wolves
was selected for a further analysis because of the relatively
high number of relocations.During 1982,the Watana Pack
32
-
occupied a territory of 482 mi 2 (1246 km 2 )within and adjacent to
both the proposed Watana and Devil Canyon impoundments.Twenty-
six of 58 (45%)relocations of Watana Pack members were at or
below high pool level of the impoundments.During the first half
of the year (January through June)over half (57%)the recorded
observations were at or below maximum pool level.Fifty-one mi 2
of the 482 mi 2 territory were greater than 4,000 ft.altitude and
were rarely used by the pack «4%of all relocations).Of the
431 mi 2 of usable habitat wi thin the Watana pack terri tory,
55 mi 2 would be inundated by the two impoundments.However,the
55 mi 2 (13%of territory)accounted for 45%of the annual loca-
tions of the pack,indicating that the lower elevations are
preferred by wolves in the Susitna River Basin.This was
probably the result of higher concentrations of moose in thes·e
lower attitudinal areas.
At the time this report was prepared,information on exact
locations and extent of area covered by encampments,borrow sites
and road and transmission corridors was not available.However,
preliminary site locations have been mapped,and their location
will further limit the extent of the Watana territory.The exact
percent of habitat loss of the Watana territory is not known.In
particular,quarry sites A and B,and borrow sites D,E,F,I,J,
and L will at least have portions within the Watana territory and
will impact the Watana wolves during and/or after construction of
\iia tana Dam.
The percent of various elevational strata av~ilable to the pack
(calculated by random selection of 482 points within the Watana
terri tory)compared to the percent of radio-locations at those
various elevations shows that between 1,801 and 2,200 ft.were
significantly preferred elevations (P <0.005).These elevational
strata were available to Watana wolves in 13 percent of their
terri tory,yet were used on ~45 percent of the locations.The
inundation of this zone will undoubtedly affect the shape and
extent of wolf territories and subsequent recruitment and mor-
tali ty of wolves in the Susi tna Basin.
33
....
r
PROPOSED STUDIES
Continuation of monitoring efforts of wolves already instrumented
is important.Population and.individual pack boundaries are
highly dynamic and documentation of denning,rendezvous,and
hunting/traveling areas should be continued.Efforts should be
made to instrument numbers of additional packs,especially in the
area from Devil Canyon to Sherman.Of particular concern is a
better representation of preferred habitat types when higher
resolution vegetation mapping is fini shed.
In conjunction with ongoing moose and caribou studies,investi-
gations of calf consumption by wolves should be conducted.More
accurate documentation of food habits could be gathered in this
way.
Mitigation of the losses of major prey species (moose and cari-
bou)is of major importance to the continued viabili ty of wolf
populations.Evaluation of those mitigation options include their
impacts on wolves.
34
.-
I
-!
""i'
I
""'1"
I
I
I
BLACK BEARS AND BROWN BEARS
Thi s report is an update of information presented in earlier
reports (Miller and McAllister 1982,Miller 1983)and does not
contain analyses of all the information available on the impacts
of the proposed Susi tna Dams on black and brown bear populations.
Following tagging operations in spring 1983,43 brown bears were
radio-marked including 15 subadul ts.Five of these were in the
downstream study area.In spring 1983 40 black bears were also
radio-marked,half of these were in the downstream study area
between Portage Creek and Curry.
The reproductive status of marked female brown and black bears in
spring 1983 was consistent with the predicted pulse in cub pro-
duction expected based on the 1981 failure of the berry crop.
However,this pulse was not as large as expected largely because
some females expected to produce first litters failed to do so.
These observations support the hypothesis that proj ect-related
reductions in food supplies would negatively impact productivity
of bear populations.
Documented losses of offspring from litters of collared female
brown bears was 47%for cubs and 33%for yearlings.A limited
amount of data collected in 1983 suggested these losses resulted
from predation by other brown bears.
Kill locations for 351 brown bears in the study area portion of
GMU 13 during the period 1961-1982 were digitized based on
information recorded in ADF&G sealing documents.The sex and age
composi tion of these harvested bears are reported.These data
are presented to assist subtasks undertaking socio-economic
studies in the project area.Based on hunter kills of marked
bears,no less than 8%/year of the brown bear population is
harvested.
35
~,
....
Telemetry studies of six 2-year old bears (5 males and 1 female)
indicated that the female and 1 male remained in or near their
maternal home ranges.The other 4 males dispersed distant from
their maternal home ranges.These observations validate earlier
hypotheses that proj ect-related reductions in bear numbers or
productivi ty in the study area will impact bear populations
elsewhere through reduced emigration.
Continued high use of Prairie Creek during the king salmon
spawning season in 1983 supported earlier conclusions that this
area is a seasonally important critical habitat area for brown
bears in the study area.The area documented from which bears
are attracted to Prairie Creek is 7,200 km 2 and 2,200 km 2 for
males and females respectively.
The brown bear density estimate of 1/41 km 2 in an adjacent study
area made by Miller and Ballard (1982)remains the best available
estimate for the Su-Hydro project study are,to In 1983 an inde-
pendent estimate was derived based on the frequency or which
radio-marked bears were seen wi th other marked bears·and with
unmarked bears during the spring 1983 breeding season.Thi s
process resulted in estimates of 11-50 km 2 /bear depending on the
assumptions used.These calculations lend additional credence to
the density estimate of Miller and Ballard (1982).
Data collected in 1983 supported earlier conclusions that few
brown bears den sites would be directly affected by the proposed
impoundments.Indirect effects from increased disturbance is
considered to be the main impact mechani sm on brown bear denning.
Overall rates of harvest by hunters of marked black bears was 14%
(19%for marked males and 10%for marked females).This rate was
higher in the downstream study area (29%)than in the upstream
study area (13%).
36
/
Black bear litter sizes declined over time.Mean litter size in
dens was 2.5,2.2 after exit from dens and 1.9 for litters of
yearlings.Forty percent of black bear cubs have been lost from
Ii tters of radio-collared females.
Efforts to replicate the summer 1982 black bear census technique
in spring 1983 were unsuccessful.A tenative density estimate of
1.3 mi 2 /bear based on female home range sizes and various assump-
tions about population composition and productivity was derived.
This estimate was considered too high for 1983 populations but
was considered a reasonable approximation of the maximum carrying
capaci ty of the upstream study area (400 bears).It is antici-
pated that this estimate will be refined once adequate habitat
maps have been prepared by the plant ecology subtask.
Analyses of scats collected along salmon spawning sloughs in the
downstream study area in 1983 revealed the same pattern as seen
in 1983 studies.Berries were tr.e most abundant and common item
in these scats and salmon remains were uncommon.Radio-marked
bears in the downstream study area,however,moved to the vicin-
ity of these salmon-spawning sloughs during the salmon spawning
season as in previous years.Based on these results it is
suggested that radio-tracking stuqies of downstream black bears
be deemphasized in FY 1985 but that scat collections along the
sloughs be continued.
Of 26 black bear den sites found in the vicinity of the Watana
impoundment,15 will be inundated.Only 1 of 21 dens found in
the vicini ty of the Devil Canyon impoundment will be inundated.
Resul ts and Discussion-Black Bears
Following the May tagging effort 40 black bears were radio-
collared,half of these were in the downstream study area.No
cubs or yearlings were marked in 1983.Currently 27 black bears
37
are radio-marked including 13 in the downstream study area.
During 1983,5 bears were known shot by hunters (367,374,410,
303,and 323),2 bears di sappeared and were suspected to have
been shot (370,372,both females with cubs),3 bears shed
tr"ansmitters (301,318,349L and 3 bears died (327,379,and
365).No black bears were killed or died as a result of handling
in 1983.Capture data from 1980-1983 are given in Table 2 of the
report.Numbers of point location obtained are given in Table 4
of the report.
"""I
I
I A.Sex and Age Composition of Study Animals-Black Bears.
j'!
.I
I
The sex and age composition of the 14 remaining radio-marked
black bears in the·upstream study area (all (3 years of age)was
7 males (401,346,358, 359, 360, 324,387),and 7 females (363,
354,317,289,321,329,361).In the downstream area 2 adult
males (408,343)and 11 females (378,376,404,405,411,409,
406,402,377,369,j75)are radio-marked.Ages of these bear
can be obtained from Table 2 of the report .
B.Population Biology and Producti vi ty-Black Bears.
Miller (1983:68)predicted a pulse of cub production in 1983
based on the apparent berry failure in 1981.Of 19 radio-
collared females,18 (95%)could potentially have had cubs in
1983 and 14 did (70%).B364,missing at the end of 1982,was
also listed as expecting cubs in 1983 but remained missing
throughout 1983 so her status could not be verified.Three of
the 4 bears that were expected to have cubs in 1983 but didn't
were 5 years old in 1983 and were listed as expecting their first
litters in 1983 (363,367,369),the fourth (378)was a 7 year
old female in 1983.These data may indictate that mean age of
first litter production is older than 5.One bear at age 5 did
produce a litter in 1983 (377)but lost its cubs by 19 May.One
of the 5-year old females (363)that didn't produce a litter in
38
1983 may also have lost an unobserved litter early,the other 2
females were examined in their dens so it is certain they did not
have cubs.
The predicted 1984 reproductive status of 23 radio-marked females
(including 4 missing bears)is given in Table 30 of the report.
Excluding the missing bears,9 of 13 adult (~5)females (67%)are
expected to produce cubs in 1984.Identification of a pulse in
cub production in 1983 based on the 1981 berry failure is not
strongly supported by these data.The data,however,may be
confounded by a capture bias against females with newborn cubs.
If such a bias exists,and this is considered likely,then a
pulse in cub production by radio-marked females would be expected
in the year following initial capture of these females,indepen-
dent of any environmental factor.Additional data are needed
before these hypotheses can be analyzed.Because of the ini ti-
ation of the downstream study in 1982 and corresponding capture
of many l,ew females,thi s bias could have caused a pul se in cub
production by radio-marked females in 1983.It is also possible
that the blueberry failure evident in the upstream area did not
affect bears in the downstream study area that are buffered by
salmon and salmonberries unavailable to upstream bears.
Black bears captured in the upstream study area included slightly
more males than females while much the opposite was the case in
the downstream study area.This difference may reflect heavier
hunting pressure in the downstream area which is accessible to
riverboats out of Talkeetna and has a resident population of
homesteaders.The upstream area is accessible only by plane or,
in a few spots,ATVs.Compari s.ons of age data for these 2
populations are generally consistent with this hypothesis.Down-
stream males tended to be younger than upstream males although
the differences were not significant and the reverse was the case
for females.Heavier harvest in the downstream study area is
also supported by harvest rates of marked bears,although sample
39
sizes were small.Based on 100.marked-bears-years in the
upstream area,13%have been harvested compared to 29%in the
downstream area (31 bear-years).Overall rate of harvest of
marked bears in both areas was 14%(19%for marked males and 10%
for marked females).
Apparent natural mortali ties of radio-marked black bears are
presented in Table 34 of the report.Three natural mortalities
of radio-marked bears were recorded in 1983.Two of these were
females with cubs,both were thought to have been killed by other
bears.
Black bear litter size is presented in Tables 35 and 36 of the
report.As would be expected mean litter size is largest for the
sample counted in dens (2.5),smaller when den data are excluded
(2.2)and smaller yet for yearling li tters (1.9).These data
indicate a progressive loss of subadul ts from birth through
separation from their mothers.
Overall,40%of cubs were lost from li ttersof radio-collared
females (excludes those cubs that were doubtless lost when their
mothers'died).Thi s percentage was higher in the upstream study
area (54%)than in the downstream area (22%).This difference
may reflect the marginal nature of the upstream habitat for black
bears relative to the downstream habitat.This difference may
also reflect the lower proportion of adult males in the more
heavily hunted downstream population relative to the upstream
population;adult males may cause much of the cub mortali ty
through intraspecific predation.
Morphometries of black bear cubs and yearlings are given in
Tables 38 and 39 of the repC'rt.
40
C.Black Bear Densi ty Estimates.
-I
i
""'"
1.
2 .
Lincoln Index method.An attempt to census the black bear
population using Lincoln Index techniques on the ratio of
marked to unmarked individuals observed during transect
flights was made in spring 1983.A similar attempt in
summer 1982 yielded a population estimate of 90 bears
(47-172)ages 1 year old or older in the upstream area
(Miller 1983:58).The spring 1983 effort was an attempt to
replicate this previous effort during spring conditions when
a different set of observabili ty biases would exist.
The technique was not successful in spring 1983.In the
downstream study area half of the sample units were counted,
these contained 76%of available marked bears but no marked
bears were seen.Only 1 adult bearjhour of survey time was
spotted.In the upstream area,10 (of 37)sample units were
counted,these contained 35%of available marked bears but
only 1 marked bear was seen.Only 1 bearj146 minutes of
flight time was seen prior to aborting this unstream census
effort.
The results of the summer 1982 census effort are given in
Table 42 of the report for compari son purposes.
Home range of females method.In Minnesota,Rogers (1977)
found that female black bears tended to occupy largely
exclusive home ranges.Hugie (1982)found similar results
in Maine but Lindzey and Meslow (1977)found overlapping
home ranges in Washington.If home ranges do not overlap,
an estimate of the number of female adult bears present
could be ob~ained by partitioning the available habitat into
parcels that correspond to mean territory size and counting
these.
41
Annual home ranges of adult female black bears radio-
collared in this study revealed overlap.This overlap was
especially evident in .1981 when late summer berry crops
failed and many bears made exceptional movements,apparently
to compensate.Even in years of normal berry crops,how-
ever,female annual home ranges overlapped.
Overlaps between female home ranges were less marked when
only spring data (1 April-5 July)were included.These data
for II spring"were chosen because they precede the ripening
of the berries and the corresponding movements of bears to
areas of berry abundance.Figures 13-15 of the report
illustrate the annual spring home ranges of radio-marked
bears excluding locations at den si tes.The area of these
home ranges is given in Table 43a of the report.The
genetic relationship between these bears was unknown except
for 329 which was the 3-year old offspring of 327 and
overlapped extensively with 327 in 1983.Spring home ranges
defined in this manner overlapped less than did annual home
ranges but even these were clearly not exclusive.
Even though annual or spring female home ranges are demon-
strably not exclusive,an estimate of the number of bears
the habitat could support can be obtained by assuming that
the home ranges were exclusive.Annual spring home ranges
of 35 upstream female black bears (~3 years old)averaged
10.8 km 2 •The amount of black bear habitat in the upstream
study area can be equated with the area of the sample units
delineated during the census attempt,500 mi 2 or 1300 km 2.
If this area were completely populated by black bear females
with exclusive home ranges of 10.8 km 2 each,there would be
space for 120 adult (~3 years)females.Assuming equal sex
ratios for adults there would also be 120 males present.
Black bear females aged 3,4,and 5 are not all repro-
ductively mature,bears in these age classes constitute an
42
-----_-4 _
estimated 30%of females~3 years old leaving 80 females of
reproductive age.Based on litter size data,each of these
females would annually contribute about 1.0 cubs,and 0.8
yearlings.If there is a 50%mortality of yearlings each
female would also annually contribute 0.4 two-year olds.
Correspondingly,each of these 80 reproductively mature
females would annually contribute about 2.2 subadults
«(3 years)to the total population or an additional 175
bears.Based on these calculations,the estimated popu-
lation based on these assumptions would be about 400 bears.
Based on the 500 mi 2 of black bear habitat present this
would be a density of 1.3 mi 2 jbear or 2.1 mi 2 jadul t ~3
years.This estimate would be exaggerated by the degree to
which the 500 mi 2 of habitat is incompletely occupied;to
the degree that the home ranges overlap this estimate would
be too low.
This result can be compared with estimates obtained in other
ways.Miller and McAllister (1982:93)roughly estimated a
study area population of 340 black bears based on a Lincoln
Index during the tagging operation in August 1980,this
represented a density of 1.6 rhi 2 jbear.The summer 1982
Lincoln Index attempt yielded a corrected Lincoln Index and
estimate of 126 bears (Miller 1983:59).My guess on the
1980 bear population in the study area was 150-200 bears
(Miller 1982:59).
My subjective impression of this new estimate is that it is
too high.Part of the reason for this may be that all of
the 500 mi 2 is not good spring habitat.Another possible
reason for an overestimate is that the current population is
suboptimal,below what the habitat could support.Miller
(1983:58)noted that bear population appeared to have
declined in the study area since the project started,this
impression has been strengthened with the addition of 1983
studies.
43
.....
"'f'
I
Possibly this decline resulted from the poor 1981 berry
crop.Regardless of where this population may be at the
moment,an estimate of 400 black bears is a reasonable
approximation of the number of black bears the habitat in
the upstream study area could potentially support.
D.Analysi s of Berry Abundance.
Four transects designed to document changes in berry abundance
between years were established in 1982 (Miller 1983).This
procedure was replicated in 1983 although the exact same plots
were not read,the plots read in 1983 were in the same general
area,within 100 feet,of those read in 1982.As mentioned by
Miller (1983),insufficient manpower was available to sample
enough plots to provide good documentation of true variability in
berry abundance.Our samples were adequate,however,to provide
some support for our subj ect interpretations of berry abundance.
E.Food Habi ts.
Forty-two bear scats were collected and analyzed in 1983.
Analyses of 33 scats collected previously were presented by
Miller (1983,Table II,page 45).As reported by Miller (1983)
the predominant food in the scats collected on the shores of
sloughs where salmon were spawning in the downstream study area
were berries of Devil's club (Oplopanax horridus ) .Fi sh were
even rarer in the 1983 scats than in the 1982 scats collected
along the salmon-spawning sloughs.The difference in 1983
probably reflected the decreased availabili ty of salmon in 1983
because 1983 had the expected low,odd year,run of pink salmon
(Oncorhynchus gorbuscha),and very high water in the Susitna
during much of the spawning period.Regardless,of the absence
of abundant pink salmon in the spawning sloughs,many radio-
collared black bears moved to the vicinity of these sloughs
during late summer 1983 as they did in 1982.These results
44
the
of
....
I
1""'1
, I
!
support our tentative conclusions that these movements are more
motivated by the prevalence of devils club berries in
riparian habi tats along the sloughs than by the presence
spawning salmon .
Updated records on frequency of Susitna River crossings by
radio-marked black bears are given in Table 52 of the report.
Efforts to devise a technique using thin layer chromotography on
bile acids to separate black bear feces from brown bear scats
were unsuccessful.Results of this study are reported in
Appendix 1 of the report.
F.Black Bear Den and Denning Characteristics
Characteri stics of black bear dens observed during winters of
1980/81 through 1982/83 are given in Table 53 of the report.The
known history of use of ind:vidual dens is presented in Table 54
of the report.In March and April 1983,13 dens previously used
by radio-marked black bears were inspected.Eight of these were
vacant,3 (numbers 10,9,and 7)were occupied by radio-marked
bears,one (#19)was occupied by an unmarked bear,and one was
collapsed.Seven of the vacant dens revisited were dug dens,the
other (#19)was a natural cavity.History of den use by indi-
vidual marked black bears i s given in Table 55 of the report.
Twenty-six dens used at least once by a radio-collared black bear
have been found in the vicinity af the Watana Impoundment,15
(58%)of these will be inundated by the impoundment.By compari-
son only 1 of the 21 dens found in the vicini ty of the Devil
Canyon impoundment will be inundated by the proposed impoundment.
Den entrance and emergence dates for radio-marked black bears are
given in Tables 56 and 57 of the report for 1982/83 and 1983/84
respectively.Data for previous years was given in Miller
(1983).
45
Locations of black bear den sites are given in Figure 16 of the
report for the upstream study area and in Figure 17 of the report
for the downstream study area ..
-
46
'~---------------------------~~-~------------------------
-
.""!
~
I
1
WOLVERINE
From 1980 to 1983,22 wolverine were instrumented and monitored
for various lengths of time to assess the impacts of the proposed
Su·si tna Hydroelectric Proj ect.To gain additional information on
mortality,natality and sex and age ratios,136 additional
wolverine were examined that were harvested from or adjacent to
the study area.
Annual home ranges of males averaged 535 km 2 and females 105 km 2 •
It is suspected that there is very little overlap between home
ranges of adult males,but much overlap between the sexes.
Wolverine showed differential elevational and subsequent vegeta-
tion use in different seasons.In July,elevational use averaged
1,043 m with a corresponding decreased use of spruce habitat
types.January elevational use averaged 818 m,with a concurrent
increase in spruce forest use.Seasonal diet changes probably
induce t;,e elevational differences.The sex ratio of 158 cap-
tured and harvested wolverine was 50:50.Data indicate that
approximately 30%of the harvest is compri sed of j uveni les.
Probably the most serious impact of Susitna Hydroelectric devel-
opment on wolverine will be permanent loss of winter habitat.
Forty-five percent of all instrumented wolverine had home ranges
that overlapped the impoundment zone and will be displaced to
some when reservoir clearing or filling begins.Also,a reduc-
tion in moose population will result in a reduction in the amount
of carrion avai lable during winter.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Whitman and Ballard (1983)presented 3 scenarios which may occur
following inundation of the area upstream of the Watana dam site.
In all scenarios,decreased moose populations will eventually
(1-3 years)result in decreased carrion available to wolverine in
winter.These and other changes in prey density will affect
47
-
"9
I
wolverine movements,densities,and population size.Improved
access and a larger human population in the area will undoubtedly
present the potential for higher harvests.Should this prove
excessive,however,the state game regulatory process can
restrict these losses.
Localized avoidance of work camps and facilities will probably
not significantly influence wolverine movements or productivity.
However,habitat loss due to inundation and access corridors will
certainly influence these parameters.The Alaska Power Authority
(1983)has estimated that due to inundation and associated
acti vi ties and faci li ties,the carrying capaci ty wi 11 be
decreased by 2 wolverines.The reasoning behind this assumption
is that since average wolverine home range size is 163 km 2
(Whitman and Ballard 1983)and a total of 206 km 2 will be
affected,only 2 wolverine will be displaced.However,inun-
dation of low-level areas will result in a permanent loss of
winter habitat.We have calculated that 45%(9 of 20)of all
instrumented wolverine have horne ranges that overlap the impound-
ment zone.Assuming Whitman and Ballard's (1983)estimate is
correct,at least 35 wolverine (45%of basin population)would be
impacted to some degree by the impoundment alone.The additional
wolverine habitat altered by transmission corridors,access
roads,and work camps,will further increase the percent of
wolverine affected.
48
....
....,
DALL SHEEP
Dall sheep studies have focused on the three areas of sheep
habi tat nearest the proposed Watana and Devil Canyon dams
Mt·.Watana,Portage Creek-Tsusena Creek-Denali Highway (access
corridor)and the Watana Creek Hills.During Phase I studies,a
mineral lick used by a small Dall sheep population was discovered
in the Watana Creek Hills,adjacent to the proposed Watana
impoundment.A minimum of 31%of the observed 1983 sheep popu-
lation traveled 5 mi or more to the Jay Creek lick area,which is
below alpine sheep habitat in the lower 4 mi of Jay Creek.Sheep
travel to this area even though another smaller lick with similar
chemical anomalies is located within their alpine range.The Jay
Creek lick soil,containing significantly high levels of sodium,
is exposed in several areas mostly between 2,200-2,400 ft.Sheep
attracted to the area spent about 14%of the time below 2,200 ft
and 46%of the time below 2,300 ft.The Wa.tana impoundment
normal maximum operating level is designated as 2,185 ft with an
average annual drawdown of 120 ft .Although these proposed
impoundment levels w~ll not directly inundate any major licking
areas,erosion and ice shelves may result in the loss of licking
and resting areas,and inhibit travel along and across Jay Creek
to well-used sites.However,erosion may possibly also expose
lick soil in new areas.The lick's close proximity to the
impoundment will make the sheep seasonally vulnerable to distur-
bance from construction,transportation and recreational activ-
i ties.No sheep use of areas on Mt.Watana (directly south of
Watana impoundment)or near the Denali Highway access corridor
was documented.
IMPACTS OF WATANA IMPOUNDMENT
The Watana Creek Hills sheep population could be vulnerable to
severe impact from the proposed Watana impoundment because of
disturbance to the Jay Creek lick area.This area,adjacent to
the proposed Watana impoundment,is used by a large proportion of
49
....
the sheep population in early summer.A minimum of 31%of the
observed 1983 population used the Jay Creek lick area,and up to
31 individuals (21%of population)were seen in the lick area at
one time (the most ever recorded).Almost half of the time sheep
were in the lick area,they were below 701 m (2,300 ft)which
would be subjected to flooding and erosion.Rams used the licks
early in the season,followed by pregnant or barren ewes and
yearlings,with ewe-lamb groups not arriving until June 16.This
pattern is similar to those reported for mountain goats by Hebert
and Cowan (1971),for Dall sheep (Heimer 1973),and for moose
(Tankersley and Gasaway 1983).Sheep travel some distance to use
this lick as both winter and summer surveys have located most of
the population 7 or more air mi from the Jay Creek lick area.
Two color-marked sheep traveled 5 mi or more to the Jay Creek
lick area between Apri 1 and late May.Although Heimer (1973)
reported that sheep have traveled greater distances to a lick
site,this reported travel was within typical alpine habitat
which included escape cliffs (Heimer,pers.comm.).In contrast,
the Jay Creek lick area and much of the terrain traveled between
observed summer and winter range is atypical sheep habitat,being
relatively flat with low shrubland and trees and little rocky
cliff escape habi tat.
It appears that the essential macro-elements of sodium,magnesium
and calcium are the predominant lick components.Sulfate was
also a major water soluble lick component.Of all these elements
and compounds,sodium is most likely the main attractant.High
levels of sodium are often reported from natural licks (Fraser
and Tankersley,in prep.)and sodium is the only element of these
choices that has been shown to be selected for by ungulates at
lick sites (Stockstad et al.1953,Fraser and Reardon 1980).It
is also possible that an essential micro-element such as copper
may be an important lick element.Indications of a copper
deficiency in wild Alaskan moose have been reported (Flynn et 0/.
1977),but there is no evidence that any trace element deficiency
causes an appeti te for that substance.
50
-.
Even though the East Fork lick had higher "total"sodium levels
(as well as magnesium and calcium)than Jay Creek,sheep still
endure the danger of travel to the Jay Creek lick and visit it at
a similar rate to the East Fork lick.This may be because water
sotuble elements are more important,or because of the limited
size of the East Fork licking area,or due to habitat,earlier
spring phenology,or some other benefit of the Jay Creek area.
Also,the similar visitation rate is not necessarily the same as
the amount of licking done in each area.In any case,the
significant use of the Jay Creek area in addition to the East
Fork lick is well documented,but not well understood.1I.ddi-
tionally,attraction of the Jay Creek Bluff for licking as well
as resting (escape cover)needs to be clarified by additional
observations and soil analyses.Archeological finds in the
immediate vicinity raise intriguing questions about the history
of .Jay Creek lick use.
The cycle of filling and draining in the Watana impoundment will
subject the lick area to flooding and erosion and possibly will
leave ice shelves along the creek banks during the peak lick use
season.The Watana impoundment normal maximum operating level is
desginated at 2,185 ft in elevation,with possible flooding
levels up to 2,201 ft (Alaska Power Authority 1983,Exhibit B).
During the heaviest lick use season (May and June),the target
minimum reservoir levels are 2,092 ft (May)and 2125 ft (June).
The highest annual target minimum reservoir level is 2190 ft for
September (Alaska Power Authority 1983,Exhibit B).Even at the
normal minimum operating level of 2,065 ft,the lower portion of
the creek valley will be flooded.The proposed impoundment
levels will inundate a few low use licking areas (downstream
1,950 ft,upstream 2,190 ft,Bluff below 2,200 ft),and conse-
quent erosion and ice shelves may result in the loss of more high
use licking and resting areas (especially on the Bluff and East
Ridge),as well as inhibiting travel along and across Jay Creek.
However,erosion may possibly expose more lick soil in new areas.
51
-
.,.,
I
I
i
Fj
I
i
This soil deposit may be widespread in lower Jay Creek and also
in other areas around the Watana Hills.Similar laboratory
results to high use areas were obtained about 2,200 ft on similar
looking exposed soil bluffs 10 mi SE on the north bank of the
Susitna River (#27,#28)where sheep were observed in early June.
Even some "control"samples taken from similar looking exposed
soil bluffs had high sodium values (#29 4 mi NW,and #32 12 mi
NW),although no sheep use was observed there.Leaching sodium
or other water soluble cations from the lick soil does not appear
to be a potential impact.However,sheep attracted to the lick
area may be seasonally vulnerable to di sturbance and habitat
degradation from timber harvest around the impoundment,and other
human acti vi ties.
The Watana Creek Hills has a small·isolated sheep population,
used by sheep hunters and guides.The nearest additional sheep
habitat occurs southwest across the Susitna River around Mt.
""atana,and also farther northeast in the Clearwater Mountains
across a larger valley.The Watana impoundment,with seasonal
hazards of a large width of open water,ice shelving and unstable
ice conditions and mud shelving may depress or eliminate any
possible sheep immigration from the southwest.This could make
any detrimental impacts of the project on the Watana Hills sheep
population even more serious,as population recovery from a
project impact could be greatly slowed or made impossible by loss
of immigration opportunities.
CLIMATIC IMPACTS
A delay in spring plant growth in areas near the Watana impound-
ment (Alaska Power Authority 1983,Exhibit E)may degrade some of
the Watana Creek Hills and Mt.Watana sheep habitat.If the
Watana impoundment causes additional snow accumulation in nearby
areas,important south-facing slopes in the Watana Creek Hills
may become poorer winter habi tat.
52
I
I
....
INCREASED HUMAN ACCESS
The project development will.undoubtedly jncrease fixed-wing and
helicopter traffic.Because precautions were usually taken,
there were few observations of sheep disturbed by aircraft in
thi s study.However,low-flying aircraft,especially helicop-
ters,are known to disturb Dall sheep (Linderman 1972,Nichols
1972,Lenarz 1974).Groups of ewes and lambs (possibly including
young rams)react most strongly to helicopters (Lenarz 1974).
The dangers of aircraft disturbance include injuries sustained by
sheep whi le fleeing (Linderman 1972),wasted metabolic energy
expense (which could become critical if the disturbance is
repeated during stressful winter or lambing periods)(Geist
1971),and abandonment of habitat (Linderman 1972),which could
lower the population size.However,some sheep show habituation
to aircraft that maintain regular flight patterns and do not
approach she.ep closely (Lenarz 1974,Summerfield 1974,Reynolds
1974).MacArthur et of.(1982)found no cardiac or behavioral
responses by unhunted adult bighorn sheep to helicopters and
fixed-wing aircraft flying 400 m or more away.
Roads and reservoirs developed by the project will allow in-
creased access by vehicles and hikers who can also disturb sheep
(Tracy 1976,MacArthur et of.1982).One area where the Denali
National Park Road was built directly through sheep habitat
receives less use by sheep now than in the early 1940's,but the
exact cause of this apparent abandonment is not clear (Tracy
1976).Tracy (1976)also reported that a few Dall sheep (mostly
ewe and lamb groups)in Denali National Park were disturbed while
crossing a small valley with a road when vehicles were present.
Tour buses stopping,people exiting and making loud noises
incre~f[~ed (respectively)t~e disturbance to the sheep (observed
by th~r behavior).Reactions of sheep to moving vehicles more
than doo m away were minimal (Tracy 1976).These sheep were
I'
53
....
I'j
!
-I
I
.I
I
habituated to traffic and not hunted.Among unhunted sheep popu-
lations,sheep may habituate more readily to human presence
(Geist 1971).
Ma~Arthur ~~.(1982)documented relatively few cardiac
responses (8.8%of trials)and fewer behavioral responses (0.9%
of trials)of bighorn sheep to vehicle passes.Most of these
responses (73.7%)occurred when the vehicle passed within 25 m.
Humans approaching on foot,especially accompanied by a dog,
elicited stronger responses (MacArthur et al.1982).These sheep
were living in an unhunted sanctuary and had been regularly
exposed to humans and vehicles along a nearby road.No ewes with
lambs were monitored,which are more sensitive to di sturbance
(Murie 1944,Smith 1954,Jones et al.1963).
MacArthur et al.(1982)recommended restricting human activities
to roads and established trails,and discouraging dogs in areas
of sheep habitat.
A road builtin the upper Portage Creek are.a could cause vehic-
ular disturbance and increased hunting or poaching access which
would be damaging to the small colony of mountain goats present
there.
MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Lowering Watana's maximum reservoir level to 2,000 ft in eleva-
tion would eliminate much of the physical disturbar:ce to the main
Jay Creek lick area.Also,certain methods and scheduling of
construction acti vi ties and access would reduce the impacts of
the Susi tna Hydroelectric project on sheep.
54
Timber harvest within 2 air mi of the Jay Creek lick area should
be restricted to late August through April.The area within 0.5
mi of the lick area should remain untouched by clearing activi-
ties,including roads,logging equipment and debris,except for
those portions below the minimum operating level (2065 ft).Any
clearing wi thin 2 air mi of the lick area should be delayed as
long as possible until just before the reservoir begins filling.
This will condense the physical effects of the Watana development
into a shorter time period.
Air traffic should be prohibited bel?w 1000 ft above ground level
and discouraged between 1000-1500 ft above ground level wi thin
1.0 mi of mineral licks 1 May -15 July.Helicopter landings
within 1.0 mi of mineral licks should be prohibited during
1 May -15 July.Boat and ground access within 1.0 mi of the Jay
Creek lick area and other mineral licks should-be prohibited from....
1 May -15 July.
If the project substantially reduces availability of mineralized
substrate in the Jay Creek lick area,options of mining or
blasting the lick area to expose additional substrate,or sup-
plying similar mineral elements near the Jay Creek lick area or
other areas wi th rock cliff habi tat should be considered.
RECOMMENDAT IONS FOR FURTHER STUDY-
Impact assessment and mitigation planning is incomplete without
estimating the extent and availabili tyof the lick soil post-
impoundment.Mapping and analysis of the extent of the lick soil
and cliffs exposed post-project should be done by a geomorpho-
logist or other qualified geoscientist.
55
1
!
~
I
BELUKHA WHALE
Belukha surveys were flown in upper Cook Inlet between May 17 and
August 27,1982 and April 6 to July 20,1983.A concentration
area was identified nearshore from the mouth of the Little
Susitna River to the mouth of the Beluga River.Use of the area
increased in late May and lasted through mid-June.It is prob-
able that this concentration-was in part associated with calving
and breeding although no calves were positively identified
because of generally poor viewing conditions.The concentration
appeared to involve 200 to 300 animals,however accurate counts
were not possible because of,again,poor viewing conditions.
The Belukha concentration near the mouth of the Susi tna River
appeared to coincide with the arrival of large numbers of
eulachon which spawned in the lower Susitna River in late May and
early June.This run of eulachon was estimated to total several
million fish.King salmon are probably not particularly impor-
tant to this concentration of belukhas although large male
belukhas probably.do take some king salmon.The only other
salmon species from the Susi tna River system available in suf-
ficient numbers to be considered significant prey to the belukhas
concentrated in late May and early June is the sockeye.No
information is presently available which would allow conclusions
on belukha predation on salmon smol ts from the Susi tna River.
Given the present state of our knowledge,we cannot accurately
predict impacts on Cook Inlet belukhas from the proposed darns on
the Susi tna River.It is possible that the overall population
could suffer reduction in numbers both directly by alterations in
the habitat,particularly the concentration area near the mouth
of the Susi tna River and indirectly by reduction of available
food species.
56
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Quantification of impacts of the Susitna hydroelectric project on
belukhas at the present time is not possible.This type of
development proj ect has the potenti al for reducing the numbers
concentrating near the mouth of the river by reducing the avail-
able food or by altering the heat budget of the river.However
the overall effect·on the availability of anadromous fish to
belukhas is predicted to be small.There may be no alteration of
the heat budget of the river realized by the belukhas at the
mouth of the river,':although very little data are available to
prove this.
Approximately 5 to 8%of the total adult salmon returning to the
Susi tna River system spawn in the area from Talkeetna to Devi 1
Canyon;the area which is predicted to be the most heavily
impacted by dam construction.The slough habitat in this area is
predicted to be reduced,thereby reducing the available habitat
of the chum salmon from the system as well as a small number of
sockeye.This means that a small amount of food in the form of
adult chum and sockeye will no longer be available to the
belukhas after dam construction.Since we have no quantitative
measure of the importance of these species to the belukhas,no
estimate of impact can be made except to guess that rt will
probably be slight.
Impacts on the eulachon runs which enter the Susi tna River are
assumed to be slight as they remain in the lower reaches of the
river (Bruce Barrett ADF&G pers.comm.).This species may be
extremely important to the belukhas and it is possible that any
reduction of eulachon could severly impact the belukhas.
Although most impacts from either heat budget alteration or food
reduction are likely to be slight,we cannot accurately predict
57 .
the overall effect on the belukhas.If any environmental pertur-
bations effect the belukhas in upper Cook Inlet,it is likely
these effects will take the form of a reduction in the population
in Cook Inlet.Given our present state of knowledge,a reduction
in the belukha population of upper Cook Inlet would not be
detectable unless it were greater than a 50%to 75%reduction in
the entire population.Even a reduction of this magnitude could
go unnoticed for several years as no systematic monitoring of the
population is planned.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE STUDIES
The most immediate information need for the Cook Inlet belukha
population with respect to the Susitna hydroelectric project is a
reali stic population estimate.Generation of such an estimate
would require development of a systematic aerial census of the
belukhas in the entire Inlet from which a statistically sound
estimate could then be derived.Beyond that,future studies
should involve collections of skulls in order to determine the
taxonomic status of this population;food habits studies to
positively identify and quantify the importance of food species;
and movement studies to define the geographical range and
seasonal movements of the population.
58
LITERATURE CITED
Alaska Power Authority.1983.Susitna Hydroelectric Project
FERC License Application,Exhibit E,Chapter 3.
Arneson,P.1981.Moose-downstream.
Game.Susi tna Hydroelectric Proj.
Game Studies.Part II.64pp.
Alaska Dept.Fish
Ann.Prog.Rept.
and
Big
f""'j
I
!
Ballard,W.B,T.H.Spraker,and K.P.Taylor.1981a.Causes
of neonatal moose calf mortality in southcentral Alaska.
J.v-lildl.Manage.45(2):335-342.
Ballard,W.B.,R.O.Stephenson,and T.H.Spraker.1981b.
Nelchina Basin Wolf Studies.Alaska Dept.Fi sh and Game.
P-R Proj.Final Rep.,W-17-9 and W-17-10.201pp.
Ballard,W.B.,C.L.Gardner,J.H.Westlund,J.R.Dau.1982.
Susitna Hydroelectric Project Phase I Final Report,Big Game
Studies Vol.III.Moose-Upstream.Alaska Department of
Fish an~Game,Anchorage.
Ballard,W.B.,J.S.Whitman,N.G.Tankersley,L.D.Aumiller
and P.Hessing.1984.Susi tna Hydroelectric Proj ect 1983
Annual Report,Big Game Studies Vol.III.Moose-Upstream.
Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game,Anchorage.
,R.O.Stephenson,S.D.Miller,K.B.Schneider,and------
S.H.Eide.In Prep.Ecological studies of timber wolves
and predator-prey relationships in southcentral Alaska.
Wi Idl.Monogr.
Banfield,A.W.F.,and R.D.Jakimchuk.1980.Analyses of
characteristics and behavior of barren ground caribou in
'i Canada.Polar Gas Project.281pp.
I
59
.-
I
Bos,G.N.1974.Nelchina and Mentasta caribou reports.Alaska
Dept.Fish and Game,Fed.Aid.in vii ldl.Rest.,Proj.W-17-5
and W-17-6.Juneau,AK.50pp.
Calef,G.W.,E.A.DeBock,and G.M.Lortie.
tion of barren-ground caribou to aircraft.
212.
1976.The reac-
Arctic 29:201-
':
I
!
Cameron,R.D.,K.R.v-lhitten,W.T.Smith,and D. D.Robey.
1979.Caribou distribution and group composition associated
wi th construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.Canadian
Field Naturali st 93:155-162.
Flynn,A.,A.W.Franzmann,P.D.Arneson and J.L.Oldemeyer.
1977.Indications of a copper deficiency in a subpopulation
of Alaskan moose.J.Nutr.107:1182-1189.
Fraser,D.,and E.Reardon.1980.Attractior.of wild ungulates
to mineral-rich springs in central Canada.Holarctic Ecol.
3:36-40.
Fraser,D.and N.G.Tankersley.
mineral licks by wild ungulates
bibliographic review.
In Prep.Use of
in North America:
natural
a brief
Gasaway,W.C.,S.D.Dubois,and S.J.Harbo.1982.Moose
Survey Procedures Development.Alaska Dept.Fish and Game.
P-R Proj.Final Rept.66pp.
Geist,V.1971.A behavioral approach to the management of wild
ungulates.pp 413-424 in Duffey,E.and A.S.Watt,eds.
The scientific management of animal and plant communi ties
for conservation.11th Symp.Brit.Ecol.Soc.,Blackwell
Sci.Publ.
60
Hanscom,J.T.,and T.E.Osterkamp.1980.Potential caribou-
ice problems in the Watana reservoir,Susitna hydroelectric
proj ect.The Northern Engineer 12:4-8.
Hebert,D.,and 1.MeT.Cowan.1971.Natural salt licks as a
part of the ecology of the mountain goat.Can.J.Zool.
49:605-610.
Heimer,W.E.1973.Dall sheep movements and mineral lick use.
Fed.Aid Wildl.Restoration Final Rep.Proj.W-17-2,
W-17-3, W-17-4, W-17-5,Job 6.1R,Juneau.67pp.
Hemming,J.E.1971.The distribution and movement patterns of
caribou in Alaska.Alaska Dept.Fish and Game,Wildl.Tech.
Bull.No.1.60pp.
Horejsi,B.L.1981.Behavioral response of barren ground
caribou to moving vehicles.Arctic 34:180-185.
Hugie,Roy Dean.1982.Black Bear Ecology and Management in the
Northern Conifer-Deciduous Forests of Maine.Ph.D.Thesis,
Uni v.of Montana,203pp.
Jones,F.F.,R.F.Batchelor,H.R.Merriam,and L.A.Viereck.
1963.Sheep and goat investigations.Vol.II I,Alaska.....
Dept.Fish and Game,Ann,Proj.Seg.Rep.Fed.Aid.Wildl.
Rest.Proj.W-6-R-3,Work Plan E.
Klein,D.R.1971.Reaction of reindeer to obstructions and
disturbances.Science 173:343 -398.
Lenarz,M.1974~The reaction of Dell sheep to an FH-1100
helicopter.Chapt.III in Jakimchuk,R.D.,ed.The
reaction of some mammals to aircraft and compressor station '
noise disturbance.Can.Arct.Gasline Stud.Biolog.Rep.
Ser.Vol.23.
61
,~
....
Linderman,S.1972.A report on the sheep study at the Deitrich
Ri ver headwaters.Appendix I I I in Nichols,L.and
W.Heimer.Sheep Report,Vol.XIII,Proj.Prog.Rep.Fed.
Aid Wildl.Rest.Proj.W-17-3,W-17-4.
Lindzey,Fredrick G.and E.C.Meslow.1977.Home range and
habitat use by black bears in southwestern Washington.
J.Wildl.Manage.41(3):413-425.
MacArthur,R.A.,V.Geist,and R.H.Johnston.1982.Cardiac
and behavioral responses of mountain sheep to human distur-
bance.J.Wildl.Manage.46:351-358.
Miller,F.L.,and A.Gunn.1979.Responses of Peary caribou
and muskoxen to helicopter harassment.Canadian v-lildlife
Service Occasional Paper Number 40.90pp.
Miller,Sterling D.ancl Dennis C.McAllister.1982.Big Game
Studies,Vol.VI Black Bear and Brown Bear.Susitna Hydro-
electric Project Phase I Final Report (March 1982).Alaska
Department of Fi sh and Game.233pp.
Miller,S.D.and W.B.Ballard.1982.Density and biomass
estimate-s for an interior Alaskan brown bear,Ursus arctos,
population.Can.Field-Nat.96:448-454.
Miller,S.D.1983.Big Game Studies,Vol.VI Black Bear and
Brown Bear.Susitna Hydroelectric Project Phase II Progress
Report (April 1983).Alaska Dept.of Fish and Game.99pp.
Modafferi,R.D.1982.Moose-downstream.Alaska Dept.Fish and
Game.Susitna Hydroelectric Proj.Phase I Final Rept.Big
Game Studies.Vol II.114pp.
Modafferi,R.D.1983.Moose-downstream.
Game.Susi tna Hydroelectric Proj.
Big Game Studies.Vol.I I.114pp.
62
Alaska Dept.Fish and
Phase II Annual Rept.
Mohr,C.O.1947.Table
American small mammals.
of equivalent populations of
Am.Midl.Nat.37(1):223-249.
North
Murie,A.1944.The wolves of Mount McKinley.
Nat.Parks of the U.S.Fauna Ser.5 238pp.
Fauna of the
Nichols,L.1972.Productivity in unhunted and heavily ex-
ploi ted Dall sheep populations.In Nichols,L.and
W.Heimer.Sheep Report,Vol.XIII,Proj.Prog.Rep.,Fed.
Aid Wildl.Rest.Proj.W-17-3, W-17-4,Job No.6.4R.
Pitcher,K.W.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric
Final Report,Big Game Studies Vol.IV.
Department of Fi sh and Game,Anchorage.
Project
Caribou.
Phase I
Alaska
Pi tcher,K.W.1983.Susi tna Hydroelectric
Final Report,Big Game Studies Vol.IV.
Depar tment of Fi sh and Game,Anchorage.
Project Phase II
Caribou.Alaska
'""'I
I
I
I
Reynolds,P.C.1974.The effects of simulated compressor
station sounds on Dall sheep using mineral licks on the
Brooks Range,Al aska.Chapt.I I in Jakimchuk,R.D.,ed.
The reaction of some mammals to aircraft and compressor
station noise disturbance.Can.Arct.Gasline stud.
Biolog.Rep.Ser.Vol.23.
Robey,D. D.1978.Behavioral patterns of barren-ground caribou
of the Central Arctic herd adjacent to the Trans-Alaska Oil
pipeline.M.Sc.Thesis,Univ.Alaska.199pp.
....
I
I"'l",,
Rogers,Lynn L.
Population
Minnesota.
1977.Social Relationships,Movements,and
Dynamics of Black Bears in Northeastern
Ph.D.Thesis,Univ.of Minn.194pp.
63
Skoog,R.O.1968.Eco logy
granti)in Alaska.Ph.D.
Berkeley,CA.699pp.
of the caribou (Rang/fer tarandus
Dissertation,Univ.of California,
-
Smlth,D.R.1954.The bighorn sheep in Idaho--its status,life
history,and management.Idaho Department of Fish and Game,
Wi ldl.Bull.No.I,Boi se.
Stockstad,D.S.,M.S.Morris,and E.C.Lory.1953.Chemical
characteristics of natural licks used by big game animals in
western Montana.Trans.North Am.Wild.Con£.18:247-258.
Summerfield,B.L.1974.Population dynamics and seasonal move-
ment patterns of Dall sheep in the Atigun Canyon area,
Brooks Range,Alaska.M.S.thesis,Univ.Alaska.109pp.
Tankersley,N.G.and W.C.Gasaway.1983.Mineral lick use by
moose in Alaska.Can.J.Zool.61:2242-2249.
Tracy,D.M.1976.Reactions of wildlife
along Mount McKinley National Park road.
Alaska,Fairbanks.
to human activity
M.S.Thesis,Univ.
-
Vilmo,L.1975.The Scandinavian viewpoint.Pages 4-9 In
J.R.Luick et 01.,ed.Proceedings of the First Inter-
national Reindeer and Caribou Symposium.Biological Papers
of the Universi ty of Alaska Special Report No.1.
Whitman,J.S.and W.B.Ballard.1983.Susitna Hydroelectric
Project Phase II Progress Report,Big Game Studies Vol.III.
Wol verine.Alaska Department of Fi sh and Game,Anchorage.
64
'"
f',IIIiijf,
-
-
....
r
PERSONAL COMMUNICATION
Warren Ballard,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Research
Biologist,October 1982.
Barrett,B.M.,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,2207 Spenard
Road,Anchorage,Alaska 99503,February 1983.
Heimer,W.,Game Biologist,Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
Fairbanks.
65