HomeMy WebLinkAboutDistribution and Habitats of Moose in AKDistribution and Habitats of Moose in Alaska
Robert E. LeResche
Richard H. Bishop
John W. Coady
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
Fairbanks, Alaska USA
. DISTRIBUTION
PLEISTOCENE DISTRIBUTION
RECENT PREHISTORIC DISTRIBUTION
EARLY HISTORIC DISTRIBUTION: 1800-1950
Interior and Southern Alaska -
Arctic Alaska -
Hestern Alaska -
CONTE}WORARY DISTRIBUTION: 1950-1972
Southeast Alaska -
Southcentral Alaska -
Prince Hilliam Sound -
Kenai Peninsula -
Alaska Peninsula -
Upper Bristol Bay Drai~ages -
Hatanuska and Lmver Susi tna Valleys -
Copper and Upper Susitna River -
Northern Alaska -
Interior Alaska -
Hestern and Arctic Coastal Alaska -
Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta -
UPLAND CLIHAX COMMUNITIES
Hillm.;r Communities -
Shrub Birch Communities -
Noose Use -
LOh1..A""l'D CLIMAX COMMUNITIES
Characteristics -
Tanana Flats, Interior Alaska -
Hoose Use -
HABITATS
r
[
.....
r
L
[
c
C
E
0
D
ffl
u
c
' u
c
[
c
I
[
r~
.___j
c
r-~~
L
GLACIAL and RIPARIAN SERAL COMHUNITIES
Characteristics -
Noose Use -
FIRE CREATED SERAL COMMUNITIES
Characteristics -
Composition -
Production -
Rate of Growth -
Shape of Burn, Diversity and "Edge Effect" -
Noose Use -
P~THROPOGENIC HABITATS and EFFECTS OF DEVELOPMENT
OTHER HABITATS
SUMMARY
LITERATURE CITED
r
F
r
L
[
c
[
I
E
r _ _.
p
lJ
J'l
LJ
[
' u
[
[
[
[
r--,
._i
.....
' .
......
ABSTRACT
Moose (Alces alces) have been present in Alaska since mid-
to late Pleistocene times. They probably survived in rclz..~ively
small, disjunct groups wherever suitable habitat could be found
throughout this period, when a tundra-steppe community dominated
much of the Alaska refugium. With the close of the gl~ci2.l period,
climatic warming, and proliferation of shrub and forest co~~0n-
ities, they spread throughout much of Alaska. In more recc.:;:.-t.
times riparian and subalpine willow communities have prcviC:.sd ...
means of maintaining minimal populations able to exploit new
range produced by fire and other disturbances. This pc..-c.tc·.~~
persists today. Very recent extensions of moose dis·tribut:ion
have occurred in the geographic extremes of Alaska: in South-
eastern Alaska, where glacial recessions have allowed moose to
expand along major river valleys crossing the coasta~ r~nse, and
in northwestern Alaska, where moose have become establi.she:5. o··
the western Seward Peninsula and north of the Noatak F~.:'_ver. C:l.
the Arctic Slope moose seem to have been established £~~ a
longer time than on the western tundra areas, but are c~rre~tly
increasing in numbers. In most of Alaska, moose numbers 1-.:::ve:
risen and declined dramatically in local areas over t~e la~. 150
years, largely in response to creation and maturation of .(-: . ...:....-'.. ...
caused seral range. Historical accounts that moose w~re a01:~
-·-"' '"" \
I
r
r
L
[
' l~
[
t
n
·-"
c
r'l
.......
[
-"'!
L
[
!'
Lei
I'
L
r
L.
......
-"
.......
from a particular locale most likely reflect only a pericd or
very low moose numbers resulting from a prolonged absence o2 fires
in that area. Extremely low densities of moose presently e.xis~:
in some areas where extensive spruce stands are dominant. rc~:.--.~ t:.S
in most of Alaska the purported variations in moose distrib~~icn
have in reality been only variations in relative abundance. Eoose
numbers increased steadily through the 1950's and early l96,J' s
throughout most of the state, largely in response to rather
regular recurrence of extensive wildfires. In many areas rL;r:::bers
apparently exceeded severe winter carrying capacity. In 0u:~ of
Southcentral and Interior Alaska, moose numbers have sta:-jil~.:.::cs~
or declined in recent years, primarily in response to a scr~es
of severe winters, complicated by deteriorating range co:r_-~::it...::. '.::.-~-..;:;;,
changing hunting pressure, and predation.
The most important moose habitats in Alaska include both
climax and subclimax communities. Moose are present in low densities
·thro'llghout the climax taiga communi ties of the northern :borec:.:.
forest. Climax upland birch -willow communi ties ana l.c!-:_a::-:::.
bog communities support greater densities of animals, as co
continuously-renewed riparian seral communities and more c.r:
post-burn communities. Upland moose habitats are very i:·<)C,.
in many areas of the state. These habitats are timberlL:c ::;_, "'-·
corru.-nunities characterized by birch and willm-'1, with heat:.c a ..
.J ,
~
~ i
.,
.,
""!
....
r-~
L.-
[
r
r·
L
(!
L ...
[
-'I
L
[
[
[
[
' .__.
[
r··
L.
forb understories. These habitats are used most intensively
in summer and autumn, but are year-round residences for moose
in some areas. Lowland climax communities are many and diverse,
occurring on the broad alluvial plains common south of the Brooks
Range. These communities are especially important duri~g spring
and summer, and support tremendous concentrations of moose during
calving. Riparian wLllow communities, although seral i~ nature,
are consistently present because of constant renewal. rr:1e~! ~~-~-c
key winter ranges in much of Alaska and are the only hc.:::it;;_-c.
consistently occupied by moose in Arctic areas. Fire cre2.",:<::d
communities have been responsible for the greatest den::;i_·::ie:;.=: of
moose achieved in Alaska, but are the least permanent of t~e
habitats discussed. Species composition, size of burn, rc:~:: .. ::: oi
growth, diversity of communities and ecotone created tcset:>:~::-
determine the impact of a burn on moose populations. Moose are
generally unable to alter the rate of post-burn succession, but
may alter its course, by destroying some favored forage 3Fcc:.:.es.
With the exception of burns man-made habitats have been ~ss~~ ~~-e
in Alaska as a whole, although local moose populations ha'l./2 .-, __ _
affected in recent times.
~·~·
... \ '·'
r
r
r
L
[
c
[
E
c
c
,.
r~
L
c
' ' '['
[
[
[
[
r~
L
c
r
L
Hoose (Alces alces) entered North America through Alaska and today
remain distributed over most of the state, from the Arctic Ocean to the
Alaska Peninsula and the Southeastern Panhandle. This review descri:)es
probable past distributions and known present distribution of moose ::1
Alaska, and describes and discusses the major habitats important to r.:oo;:;e
in the state.
The Alaskan moose (Alces alces gigas Miller) (Hall and Kelson, 1959)
has ah1ays impressed scientists and sportsmen alike with its conside-.:-ab:'.e:
body and antler size. Earliest accounts of the size of Alaskan moose
were those of hunters arid coliectors of trophy antlers who created sTial~
sensations with antlers approaching 2 m in greatest spread (Lutz, l'JGO).
The type locality for A. ~· gigas is the Kenai Peninsula; the arec:. b:ow~<,
at the turn of the century, as the home of the "giant Kenai moose." Since
that time trophy hunters have found moose to equal and exceed thosE: c-.:
the Kenai throughout much of Alaska (Alberts, 1971).
'Hoose in most of Alaska as well as in adjacent portions of C.::~::~:~a
are considered A. ~~·gigas~ but intergradation with A • .§.• anderson::.
probably does OCfUr in Southeastern Alaska (Klein, 1965).
DISTRIBUTION
P-.:-esent distribution of moose in Alaska is shown in Figure 1. :~~o·::.
recorded and recalled observations it is clear that moose dis tributi,,::
~eN~
end abundance in Alaska has been and continues to be very dynamic. ..2
vti.ll briefly review prehistoric records of moose and more fully cor.r.ent
on the probable processes leading to present conditions.
" ~~
.r
E
PLSISTOCEXE DISTRIBUTION
.r
L Noose are Alaskan and North American residents of long standhg.
[ Flero,.,r (1967) surmised that larger Pleistocene manunals originating in
Eurasia crossed the Bering Land Bridge readily, perhaps as early .::,s t;-,e;
[ Kansan glacial period. Noose remains have been identified from sedime:n::s
of Illinoian age (100,000-175,000 years old) in central Alaska (P&;;;e "''-1d
[ Hopkins, 1967). Repenning (1967) indicates~ immigrated frc:~: /ale-
E arctica early in the Rancholabrean mammalian age (between the Illinoian
and Hisconsin glaciations) and are knmm from an earlier period (Gu:1z
.C glaciation) in northeastern Siberia. Later immigrations durii."lg tl:e I-:~ :;.:or:sin
I (10-35,000 years ago) glaciation are implicit in these observations, sr::i c probably contributed to development of subspecies among Alces. ~z=.e.ir-
~ r (1965) recorded the relatively recent penetration of the Coast Rc:,-::foe
L icefields of Southeastern Alaska by moose from the Alaska-Yukon rz<~-~g::_<2l
[ as far south as the Taku River, Hhere they intergrade with A. ~· _£:-.:lei_-,;:-Jc:i.
Progenitors of andersoni Here likely earlier immigrants than thos2 of
n
L gigas, for moose remains are known from the refugium south of the
c Continental ice sheet (Osburn 1921, cited by Klein 1965).
l:lopkins (1967) characterized climatic changes produced by IE::..nc.::..:m
[ and Hisconsin glaciations as "severe refrigerations" that resul t2.:: ir. 2.
lm-7ering of treeline by 400 m or more (Pewe 1965, Rep enning et aJ.. 1954)
[ and produced a considerably dryer climate than exists today. On ,-~e · .~s:Ls
of several lines of evidence various authors agree that Alaska a:-,d. Je·.~i.::.3_i.:;
[ in general supported largely steppe and tundra during these glacL, ::ic:;,o
r ( cf. Rep enning 196 7, 11cCullock 196 7, Colinvaux 1964a, 1964b, 196 ~ ) .
~ Repenning (1967) noted that most of the Rancholabrean immigrants tc L::s~~a
c /..-·t---·,,
r~
~
r
r
f1
L
[
c
[
[
[
[
r
l_j
[
--,
L
[
[
[
[
r.,
.._,)
[
r~
L
,.Jere boreal foms, already adapted to an arctic-subarctic environrr.ext.
Guthrie (1968) studied data on collections of Pleistocene large :cayr,r:,a_
renainskrom four mining areas near Fairbanks in central Alaska. SecliF::nts
I
containing the remains were of Wisconsin age at three sites, and r;re-
Wisconsin at the fourth. Remains of grazing mammals predominated at
all sites, and browsing mammals were very scarce. Moose comprised .~.ess
than one percent of the remains except at one site, -v1here they .::cr·::,·:()a: -,2.,-:
five percent. Guthrie concluded that the habitat of this mammalia:-: cc::p::_ex
was a grassland supporting a substantially larger biomass than tl·ie :;r:_,::;ent
vegetation complex, typical of Interior Alaska moose habitat.
RECENT PREHISTORIC DISTRIBUTION
On the basis of former forest ext~nsion with beaver (Castor SP?·!
present on the Seward Peninsula, and of glacial recession in the c;:cGo· .3
Range, McCulloch (1967) concludes an early Recent warming trend occ.lr:c·c.::
in Northwestern Alaska 8000 to 10,000 years ago. A cooler perioc: foll::.o "-·~
w-ith reverse effects. Follmving this, HcCulloch believes the Pos tg::.ac~-~--~-
themal maximum occurred in Alaska 3,000 to 6,000 years ago. Si:~.c2 t::::c{:
brief thermal fluctuations have occurred, with the most interestL:_~ il(;:e
from our viewpoint that small glacial advances occurred in the :Srcc;_.~s ... :j~ -'-
about 1,000 to 1,500 years ago, and again during the first half of ch2
18th century (Porter 1964). During the last 200 years the climae: .1a.'
grown >varmer.
Although there is little direct evidence of moose distribut:'.c:; f· .. Ji~.
this period, it is clear from this brief summary that clir:~atic tn,_r.::J.s
were conducive to improved habitat conditions for moose. If beaver inv<'• ''
r
F
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
c
fl
L
[
----.
L
c
[
[
[
r.,
~ ........
[
r-~
L
,,,estern Sc•vard Peninsula, it is very likely moose did also. Altl1(mgh bot·,,
subsequently disappeared from that area, the response of forest and beaver
to the early Recent warming is indicative of change that surely occurred
in vegetation and in distribution of browsers such as moose as cli!:,e:.tic
'lvilming ensued.
In summary, once moose immigrated to Nearctica they persisted, in
Alaska at least, under marginal circumstances for several thousand yea~s.
During much of this time the environmental circumstances could hardly
have been better than those to which Miller et al. (1972) attributed
the death of a lone moose in the Keevmtin District of Canada, concluding
it had "overextended" its range.
During the last few thousand years, development of exte~'1sive s:-.ru·:·
and forest communities favored increased moose densities throughouL
much of Alaska. As taiga developed, pioneering willow communities (in
areas of glacial recession, unstable slopes and riparian situatior.s)
probably assumed ·increasing importance, since the taiga is basical.J..y
incapable of supporting high densities of moose~ Nevertheless, ove::-aL ..
trends in plant communities undoubtedly favored moose.
EARLY HISTORIC DISTRIBUTION: 1800-1950
Pos t-P leis tocene moose remains and -:ai tten records o.f moose di.s cr:':. --
bution prior to 1800 are scarce. The record is little better since :h~~
tirc1e for many parts of the state because few people possessing \vritten
language travelled or lived in those areas. Some information has ·:::::an
gained from early explorers and archaeological work, and inferences ca:..
be made on the basis of native cultures.
:[
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
c
n
Li
[
....,
L
[
[
c
[
r
LJ
l
r~
L
Interior and Southern Alaska -Lutz (1960) reviewed early records froL
many sources on the occurrence of moose in Alas kl, and concluded that
moose have long been residents of most of Alaska. In vie"t-7 of the foregoing
discussion of moose in Pleistocene times, and considering probable evolu-
tion of biotic communities (Hopkins 1967) since that time, no other
conclusion seems tenable.
There is no need to repeat all of Lutz's comprehensive revie;; ,. but
a feVJ references will serve to shmv that moose were present over ~-,..::ch of
Alaska in ·the 1800's, when Caucasian activity was increasing rapl<il;.
La:Perouse (1797) observed a tanned moose hide at Lituya Bay (sout:: of
Cape Fairiveather, Southeastern Alaska) in 1786. This hide was ve.::y likely
obtained in trade, hoVJever. Wrangell (1839) noted that Indians o£ the
Copper River used moose hides and sold them, and that moose occurred
throughout the Copper River Basin, a large area in Southcentra1 Alaske:.
Zagoskin (1967) noted moose or their use by Indians along the Y~~a~,
Kuskobvim, Innoko and Koyukuk Rivers of Interior Alaska in 1842 CC· l8!,c'
Howard (1868) noted deer (caribou, Rangifer tarandus) and moose on
the Alaska Peninsula, and that moose meat was the main food at Ft. Yukon,
far up the Yukon River. Raymond (1871) stated moose were numerou:, on the
upper Yukon in 1869, and in 1873 reported that moose occurred on ~-,·.2 ,._:.vik
River, Tanana River, and Porcupine River, all tributaries a: the ·!~..;;:or.
River. Turner (1886) reported that moose were abundant at the headHaters
of the Tanana, Kuskokwim and Nushagak Rivers. Wickersham (1938) ,_,:te.: ::h2
presence of moose along the Yukon River bet~veen Eagle and Circl2 .·_:·ar
the. Canadian border in 1901-1902, and abundant moose along the X2;~~is:ma
River north of McKinley Park in 1903. Sheldon (1930) commented c-:-: ~"lu:-:.erous
~·1: .
.... I
·-!.,,
[
[
r
L
c
c
[
[
[
c
p
L;
[
~--.,
L
[
r~
L
[
[
f'
.J
[.
r .,
L....i
sightings of moose in McKinley Park in 1904. Osgood (1909) found moose
locally abundant betHeen Eagle and Circle on the Yukon River, and noted
market hunting was heavy adjacent to these settlements. Lutz (1960)
gives many references to show that moose were known on the Kenai Peni~-
sula since the early 1800's, and in fact were present in archaeological
sites dated to about 750 B.C. He concluded that the often repeated
story that moose were absent from the Kenai prior to 1870-1900 had r:o
basis in fact.
Mur.ie (1959) cites Osgood 1 s (1904) report that moose were repor"ced
in several local areas on the Alaska Peninsula between 1901 and 1903,
including a report from as far west as Port Moller. Chatelain (1952)
repo::cted that residents felt moose had "invaded" the Alaska Peninsu.=_a
about 1923 or 1924. However, it is most likely that moose numbers ">7sre
rapidly recovering from effects of the last major volcanic eruption cf
Mt. Katmai in 1912 (Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1973). Vezet<L~ ~n
over a considerable portion of the upper Alaska Peninsula was danaf~'""j, cr
killed by ash from this eruption.
Thus it appears that moose were present throughout most of Inte:~ior
and Southcentral Alaska in the 1800 1 s. In some areas they apparen:::.::_;·
v7ere abundant. Athabascan Indians of Alaska developed a tradition oc:
depencience on moose for a substantial proportion of their food and c.::_oc:::-
ing, particularly during winter when moose tended to congregate in
riparian v7illow stands.
Still, numerous early accounts exist of moose being absent from a
particular area, or of having recently moved into a locale; we belie·,re
moose were present in most of these areas, but their numbers may ~,l.ve
been extremely low at various t~mes.
r
[
.Arctic Alaska -In the Brooks Range, on the Arctic Slope, and Oi.-, the tur,dra
r
L of northern and ,.,estern Alaska moose \vere apparently very scarce <lt tile
[ turn of the 20th Century. Leopold and Darling (1953a) suggest moose were
rare on the North Slope in the early 1900's because most travellers on
c the Colville River failed to mention moose or their signs. Moose did not
inhabit the Colville River Delta until about 1890 to 1910, were seen 1~arely
[ through about 1930, and became common by the early 1950's, based ::m o:.1r
[ interpretation of events reported by Bee and Hall (1956). Bee snd Eall
also cite Stone's (1903) observation of a moose on the upper Colv::..lJ '~
[ River in 1900.
The Nunamiut Eskimo of Anaktuvuk Pass formerly ranged throc.z'>o· c the central Brooks Range, Arctic Slope, and dovm to the Arctic c>.:.s ~"
n Robert 0. Stephenson (vive ~) summarizes the Nunamiut 's colle::: c:Lc:~
L observations thus: moose \·7ere rare, essentially absent, fron cc:.: ::.:·.,::..
c B.rooks Range and Arctic Slope from around 1900 to about 1930. A: 1 .. ::..:;;:
in the early 1930's moose were still essentially absent on the r:-.i·::i.d~_e
--,
L Colville River. A few moose were seen in the late 1930's, and t1:e.y ·:;e.::e
[
common in some places along the Colville. During the late 193C ',, a..· .. c 19~::
moose slowly became more abundant, and they were quite common ix: th-:: l9.5i.·
[ Stephenson feels that intensive native hunting along th.s well-;::· :..veJ .::d
Colville River may have retarded growth of the moose populatioc: --,ri.J.r·
r ._,
to 1920. Most of the Nunamiut moved to the coast in the 1920! s ;:nd early
[
1930's, removing much of \vhatever hunting pressure they had app-:.J2c!, and
the moose population subsequently increased. Wolves nay vlell ,-: ·. '2. c."':-,c -
r~ buted to control of moose until the late 1940's and early 1950'E; vk:n
~ extensive predator control work was done on the Arctic Slope.
[ /I
I
r·~
r
[
r
L
[
c
[
[
r
[
r
Li
[
' L
[
[
[
[
r .._.
L
r-~
L
Trends in moose numbers follm·7ed a similar pattern south of the
Brooks Range in the upper Koyukuk River drainage. Observations gathc"::ed.
from older residents of the Koyukuk by Stephenson indicate moose r.1ere
first seen around Wiseman (upper Koyukuk River) in 1922 to 1924, after
virtual absence for perhaps 20 years. Further down the Koyukuk River at
Huslia, moose became noticeably common about 1925 (R. A. Rausch, viv:="
~, from Jack Sackett of Huslia). James Tobuk, Anaktuvuk Pass (vi'~?:.
voce), felt that the influx of miners in the early 1900 1 s subs tar: ic: :_:;__-.,
depressed moose numbers along the Koyukuk River.
In summary, available records for the Brooks Range and Arc tic S .. ::>:;?e
;i:ndicate fe,., moose about 1900, with a very slmv increase result~;:~ i"
moose becoming corrunon, and in some locations abundant, by the e2r.iy i05C's.
Hoose numbers seen to have increased in similar fashion on the sc~"tr: side
of the central Brooks Range.
\-!estern Alaska -Along the northwestern and western coast of Alas: a ;:,e;ose
seem to have been essentially absent beyond treeline at the turn cf the
century, but few records exist. Hadleigh-lvest (1966) found no r:.oose
remains in archaeological excavations of two houses at Ogotoruk Cree~:,
near Cape Thompson on the north\-7est coast. The houses had been o~:C12)i2d
from about 1880-1900 until recently. Remains of various other t:::::;~res ::-::-ic.l
and marine animals \-7ere abundant. What accounts are available conce:.:·~-! __ ;_,
the Noatak and Kobuk Rivers suggest a gradual increase in moose :· :::1b c:·~·,,
similar to that in the central Brooks Range. On much of the Sevn~_:d ~-:,~,.;.:1-
sula moose were absent until perhaps as recently as the last 30 ~rc;ars.
South of the Seward Peninsula moose probably occurred in small, disjunct
groups along streams flowing into Norton Sound where treeline extencs -co
;:)'' ,.
~
/
[
[
r L
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
r~
L..
[
r L
[
r·-
L
the coast along many streams. Moose have evidently been reside:nts :=or
some time, because in the local Eskimo dialect there is a specific uord
for moose. By comparison, the local Eskimo word for moose on the SeHa::d
Peninsula is a modification of the word for caribou (John J. Burns> vive
voce). Nelson (1887) noted that a fe~.;r years prior to 1881 a moose v1as
killed on the Yukon Delta quite near the Bering Sea, which suggests moose
occasionally wandered west from better habitat along the Yukon River, nucl-,
as they do today.
To the best of our knowledge the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta has nev;:;r
supported more than the occasional \vandering moose.
CONTE}WORARY DISTRIBUTION: 1950-1972
Efforts to document distribution and relative abundance of moose
ti1roughout the state have increased considerably within the las1: 30 years.
Several transplants of moose have also been made, which extended ;:,,2
distribution of moose in Southeastern Alaska. In general, moose s.ppear
to be increasing and extending their distribution in extreme northern
and ~·Testern Alaska and in local Southeastern areas, while in much of
Southcentral and Interior Alaska current population trends are st;c_.0le or
dmvnuard.
Southeast Alaska -Moose naturally invaded Southeastern Alaska (the ar2~
south of Cape Fairweather) via the Chilkat, Taku, Stikine, Unuk, a;:-.d ::.~_.>.::.:,_
Rivers from Canada (Klein 1965). A small natural population also exis-.::s
at T:1onpson Bay, north of the Stikine River. It is apparently dependen;:
on secondary succession following clearcutting of timber (Alaska Depart-
ment of :Fish and Game 1973). Timing of moose invasions in the Ch='~~kat,
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
c
D
n
L
[
[
[
[
c
[
r L
[
L
Taku ;::md Unuk Rivers is not knm-m, but they must have occurred Hell before
1900. Sr,lall populations limited by restricted habitat have persisted.
----.~---------............ _,-..,... ...... ~.-......,~-·--··-··-·-~·""'~-~·~...-~--·--.,__-__ ,,.,.,..._,...,_. .. ~~·---.....-. ... ,_,~~~-~,.,--~·~~··""~...-~·"'"'.....,..._ .... ~ ... -... ~-~~ ,........-----.-.-·_._,. ___ --
Hoose probably invaded the Yakutat area by the Alsek River valley L;O
to 50 years ago, follmving recession of glaciers that previously tlocked
access (Klein 1965). Since then the population has gro-vm rapidly, and
may have approached 4000 to 5000 (Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1973)
prior to the ~vinter of 1971-72, ~vhen substantial losses occurred dec: to
deep snow. The Icy Cape-Yakutaga area north of Yakutat may have been
colonized by moose from Yakutat, or from the Copper River Delta popula.-
tion.
Moose apparently became established in the Stikine River valle;r
between 1875 and 1900 (Klein 1965). Habitat is limited, but a sr-,a.ll
population thrives there. T~venty-one moose calves were transplant..-:(: ::o
Berner's Bay, 34 miles north of Juneau, in 1958 and 1960 (Burris 19)5),
This population grew rapidly and needs control by continued sport n~nti~g
to avoid over-use of its range (Alaska Department of Fish and Game :973).
Fourteen moose calves were released at Chickamin River on the eas~
side of Behm Canal, east of Ketchikan, in 1963 and 1964 (Burris 1965).
Moose have been observed there since that time, but the popul&tion does
not seem to be increasing. Moose persist at lmv densities in the: 'Jnuk
River valley (Robert Hood vive ~).
With the exception of Yakutat, none of the Southeastern areas ca2
sustain large populations of moose, but all populations do support ~in·:_ -:::c.:.:
sport hunting. Habitat is limited to relatively small areas in ar:'~
adjacent to river valleys, where coastal and interior influences rc.i:1.g:Le..
[
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
c
c
c
c
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
r,
L
Southccntrnl Alaska -For discussion purposes, Southcentral Alaska
includes the area south of the Alaska Range, the Bristol Bay drainages,
and the Alaska Peninsula. It includes a striking diversity of ecotypc3
ranging from coastal rain forest in Prince William Sound, to tai~a soL:n
of the Alaska Range, to coastal tundra on the Alaska Peninsula.
Prince William Sound -Moose \vere probably effectively isol&':L:d
from Prince William Sound by glaciation and by Miles Canyon on th::: Cop~)E:::
River (Klein 1965). The largest extant population was establishe:l 0:.1
the Copper River Delta by a series of transplants between 1948 anci ~-9.::: ··~
(Burris 1965). This population is largely dependent upon ripariar, ·:;L >a
com.':1unities, and now occupies essentially all available range (Alai...::a
Department of Fish and Game 1973).
A fe'\v moose inhabit the Valdez area, and they occasionally rec.cl1
\vestern Prince William Sound via the Nellie Juan River (Ronald Sc:c:::.:-:-v:::. ~::__:
~voce).
Kenai Peninsula -Moose are absent from much of the southern coast
of the Kenai Peninsula, which is isolated by the Kenai Mountains and the
Harding Icefield. The eastern portion of the Kenai Peninsula is
mountainous, available habitat is limited, and in many areas b:rm1sc iE,
decadent. Moose numbers have declined here since the late l950 7 s,
although distribution has probably changed little.
Chatelain (1952) stated moose numbers on the Kenai Peninsula ' ' ~-.. -roiJ ._:. ~:-'
peaked in 1925, and had declined somewhat by 1950. He citec majo::: de:;
in 1371, 1891, and 1910 as the probable cause for subsequent noose:
increase. His comments do not relate directly to the eastern Kenai
[
[
Noose have been seen as far west as Port Moller and Pavlof Bay (Murie .
T'
L 1959, Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1973).
[
Upper Bristol Bay Drainages -The status of moose populations in ~his
area is poorly known. ·General observations indicate similar distribution
[ but lmver densities than on the Alaska Peninsula.
Hatanuska and Lower Susitna Valleys -This broad area forms 2i.i arc:
[ surrounding upper Cook Inlet, and originally supported mainly taiga vc~et&-
[
tion. Agriculture, other development, and associated fires begin~i~g ~~
the 1920's and 1930's prompted substantial production of browse spc:cies in
c much of the Hatanuska Valley and adjacent Susitna Valley (Hatter 19~~8,
Chatelain 1952, Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1973). In remote <: . .::c:.as
c llest of the Susi tna River, riparian and subalpine willow communities, :·~d
' /
n ( L..
burns and glacial outwash areas provide prime moose habitat. Moos:: pcy..1-
lations reached historic highs over much of the area in the late 1950 '~,.
[ 'Maturation of browse communities and continued human developmenc: have
since impinged on available moose winter range, particularly in tl:.::.
[ · ~ediate Anchorage area. Numbers of moose have declined in certai~ a~aas
and stabilized in others as a result. Moose numbers are still high, hmvever,
[ \vith an estimated 15,000 moose east of the Susitna River, and unknm-m but
[ substantial numbers to the west (Alaska Department of Fish and Ga:::2 1973).
Prinary Hintering and calving areas are on lowlands, and migra tior~s tc
[ adjacent highlands occur in summer and fall. Distribution and mc\·::::,er.t
patterns have not changed significantly in the last 20 years, al:.:~· ~;:..:gh
[ redistribution of wintering moose has occurred in response to mar:L:::,-:lti·~~-.
f' of range and development.
L
t .\ ···-\
i ,,...,. .. -
·• '-·'
r
L
r
[
r
L
[
j
" '
[
j[
3
l[ ~ .
~ ~ .!
lc
I
lc-..
'r...,
I-
L
[
.-,
L
[
[
[
[
r~
._,
L
r-
L
T'eninsula, but rnthcr to the foothills and broad flats extending VJest
:from the Kenai Nountains. Large fires in 1947 and 1969 have resulted in
a current peak of moose densities in this area.
Noose are found throughout the western portion of the Kenai Pe~insula.
They a~hibit strong seasonal movement patterns (LeResche 1973a and this
volume) in which substantial numbers alternately use upland willov1 communi ties
and lm·lland birch-spruce second growth. General distribution and .·:::Nement
patterns probably have changed little since 1950, but succession fc~ =.u:·7ing
fire has undoubtedly produced spatial readjustments in seasonal use -;::z.·c ~ :::r;-:.s
as lvell as an increase in moose numbers.
On the southwestern portion of the Kenai seasonal dis tri~; JLio~-, and move-
ments have probably changed little in the last 20 years. Ho-v:evE"~' certain
Hinter ranges are currently very decadent and little used. Fire::; ::c.ve been
rare in the area. Total moose population on the Kenai probabJ.:; exceeC.s 15,000.
Six moose were released on Kalgin Island in Cook Inlet near t:-,2 Ke:-.;::.i
Peninsula 'bet,veen 1958 and 1960 (Burris 1965). A small population persists
there.
Alaska Peninsula -Chatelain (1952) noted moose numbers ,,,,e;:::e increas-
ing on the Alaska Peninsula through the late 1940's. The incn:<::.se con tine.::.
in certain areas, principally south of Mother Goose Lake, througi1 the early
1960's (Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1973). Greatest den,-;;::.L<~c' of
moose presently are associated Hith Hillow communities on and &< ac; . .:;:-:::
to drainages from King Salmon River to Meshik River. An estina:-: ~d -:·, 5CO
moose inhabit the area (Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1973),
Chatelain (1952) ventured to say that moose populations would nco.:. :c;;:;_;_c.;:
great numbers on the Alaska Peninsula, but in fact they have.
.r
[
r
L
[
c
[
[
[
[
r'l J j
Li
[
--.
L
[
[
[
[
r
~
L
,-~
L
Copper River and Upper Susi tna River -This vast area lies b0t;1eeE
summits of the Alaska Range on the north and west, the Chueach Mountains
on the south, and the Wrangell Mountains on the east. Much of the area
lies above timberline, but considerable area supports predominantly taiga.
Hoose are found wherever suitable habitat is available, in plant coiTlmunities
ranging from subalpine willow to old burns and riparian communities.
Greatest concentrations of moose occur in sub-alpine climax willm·l
comnuni ties in October and November, and in lowland riparian \villoH
communities later in winter. Substantial numbers of moose occur at lo·:y
densities throughout areas supporting predominantly spruce, but I-Ii:::~ -vr.:. J_lm.,rs,
birch and other shrubs comprising a sparse understory.
Chatelain (1952) observed that moose were increasing rapidly in this
general area in response to extensive fires over the preceding 30 years.
Additional factors that may have contributed to marked increases Here
cessation of marke.t hunting and virtual elimination of wolves in r,;.uc:n of
the area, (Alaska Department· of Fish and Game 1973). An estimated 25,000
to 30,000 moose occupied the western and northern two-thirds of th:.i...:: .s.:cea
in 1965. Since then, a considerable decline has occurred for va:cious
reasons. Deterioration of range quality and quantity is most li:'-e:~y.
but predation, combined with heavy hunting pressure in certain a~eas, may
also have contributed to the decline. Range conditions may have bs2n
affected by high moose populations, and in some areas high snm.;sho.:: he.::.:·
(Lepus a;:'Lericanus) populations in 1963-1964 did kill substantial ::..;.~--~E:"rs
of 'liillm-;s (Alaska Department of Fish and Game 1973). Although lv::...;cr::.::_.
has been of only local and limited importance in creating moose ran~e,
the acreage burned in the last 15 to 20 years (Barney 1969) has declin,::,~'.
/
r
[
r
L
[
-,
L
[
E
[
c
r
Li
[
1
L
[
[
[
[
["'
.._.
L
r--·
L
to ncar zero, and therefore has made virtually no contribution to s;.:;pport
of noose.
Interior Alaska -Interior Alaska comprises the drainages of the
Yukon and Kuskob1im Rivers. In contrast to the Copper River-upper Susi tna
Ri\rer area discussed above, a large proportion of Interior Alaska is
below timberline (Viereck and Little 1972, Harhaftig 1965). Moose inL:~iJi t
all of the Interior except alpine areas.
Populations are probably more closely attuned to the frequer..c:' a:.:
extent of 'rildfires here than in any other part of the state. Ext2nsive
and important ranges of both subalpine and riparian willoHs exist t:':rough-
out the Interior, but fire-caused seral range undoubtedly detemines ::[;.e
upper limit of carrying capacity. The \varm, dry summers of the ITt:C!r>:,:;:-
are conducive to lightning storms and to excellent burning condi t:i · ts"
In the broadest sense, Interior Alaska moose distribution has :-.:l1:· -<;e:~ ...
little in the las.t 20 years; that is, no previously unoccupied rar:.::::,::: .c.s
been occupied. Changes in abundance have occurred, however. Duri;:-,,-; ::I-.e
late 1950's moose numbers appeared to be rising throughout much o::. J:r..:.:'--ricr
Alaska (U. s. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Department of Fisl-,. :1n.: C::::.~e:
unpublished reports, and Alaska Departwent of Fish and Game 1973).
quantities of additional seral range were created through relative:..y :·:::;ular
and extensive 'vildfires (Hardy and Franks 1963, Lutz 1956, Barney 3C;.
Because the quantity of climax alpine and riparian Hinter r.:::.. , e ~-~
relatively constant, seral range created by disturbance is the "---
agent for increase in carrying capacity. As Geist (1971) succL-:cL.y
states, climax-type ranges support a nucleus population from \vhic:,
individuals can rapidly colonize newly created transient (seral) hab:.. t2.t..
In Interior Alaska, fire is the. chief disturbance.
Nonv of the Interior Alaska areas most heavily used by moose in fal1
and early winter are burns that date from 1957, when an estimated 5 million
acres burned in Alaska (Hardy and Franks 1963). Local distribution of
moose is materially affected by the prevalence and successional stage of
fire site vegetation dating from that year. Annual concentrations of
moose in old burns occur usually from October into December.
Similar effects occur on a broader scale. Chatelain (1952) :cepor:ed
lmv numbers of moose along the Kuskokwim River in the taiga zone. ·;: o(. '3.-/,
moose are abundant, although areas of abundance are discontinuous. iL
contrast, moose in the Big Delta area south of Fairbanks have declinec. f:cc:-.
the abundance reported by Chatelain largely in response to succession<'il
changes in seral range.
The importance of snoH characteristics must be emphasized in a:1.y
discussion of moose distribution or abundance (Coady, this volume) • :;>,apid
accuw.ulation of snow on higher seral and sub-alpine ranges appears to
accelerate movement to lmvland seral and riparian ranges.
extended periods can substantially lower productivity, calf survi'Jal, c.:-,d
adult survival (Bishop 1969).
In summary, general distribution of moose in Interior Alas:zs. [;as
not changed materially in the last 20 years, but local distribt:ti;J:l .s-: . .i
abundance have been substantially affected by creation and matur2::~.on c:::
primarily fire-caused seral ranges. In addition, a series of r e>. :i v.: .:..?
severe Hinters (in terms of snov7 depth and temperature) has recer-,: . .:..y
caused reductions of moose numbers in much of the Interior.
Hestern and Arctic Coastal Alaska -The only area where :.:1oo.'.:>'-" hc:-.·s
significantly extended their range in the past two decades appears to ~0:
no-:.·th~v-cs tern coastal Alaska, including the Seward Peninsula north to i:.he
vicinity of Point Hope.
Noose have occurred commonly in and near the limit of timberline on
the eastern Seward Peninsula for an indefinite but long period (Alaska
Department of Fish and Game 1973). Within the last 20 to 30 years, hoHever,
they have gradually become common on the western, treeless portion of the
Peninsula. Brooks (1953) reported shooting a bull moose near Cape Prince
of Hales in 1948, one of the earliest documented occurrences of moose on
the Seward Peninsula. Chatelain (1952) commented that a few moose ·;.Te-:e
found on the Seward Peninsula. Although densities are low compared to
Interior Alaska populations, moose are nmv permanent residents throup)1oc:t
most of the Peninsula. Beyond treeline, moose depend upon upland Hillmv
COIW."!lunities for much of their summer range, and upon riparian willmv
communities in winter.
In the Kobuk and Noatak River drainages to the north moose Here
apparently scarce or absent until 50 to 75 years ago (Alaska De:::·ar:::me::-,t
of Pish and Game 1973). In coastal areas north of the Noatak Rive-;: rr.oose
were definitely absent as noted earlier. They have reached the ?oint
Hope ar.c.a only within the ~ast five years (Alaska Department of ?ish :'~::-,~
Game .1973). Beyond treeline they concentrate in riparian willov7 ::-.. ,~bite:;:
during vl:f:Ue.,-.
Thus, the western Sevmrd Peninsula and the north,vest coastal areas
of Alaska are the only actual extensions of moose distribution thc.·c: have
occurred in the last 20 to 30 years in Alaska.
Although moose have increased in number on the Arctic Slope ever the
last 20 years, their distribution has changed little. Hi thin tl.":2 last 5
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r '--"
[
r
\_,
c
..---,
L
[
[
c
[
r
L..i
[
I
L
yc:trs, r.1~my more sightings of moose have been reported, largely bc~cause
of increased actitities related to the developing oil fields. On the
basis of these various reports, limited surveys by the Alaska Departr:e:r:t
of Fish and Game, and reconnaissance by Renewable Resources Con<><Jlti::::z
Services Ltd., moose population densities appear highest from the Co1ville
River east to the Canning River. Moose do occur outside of this area along
essentially all major streams. Records are fewer from the west, but
Chesemore (1.968) recorded several sightings from the BarrO'i7Vicir,i ty and
Heade River for the period 1958-1963.
Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta -Moose distribution apparently has no:: c:~::mged
appreciably over the last 20 to 30 years in the Yukon-Kuskokwim I'olta
area, "tvhere occasional wanderers are the rule, nor in Norton Souo:1d, Hi:·.c::-e
moose regularly approach the coast along timbered valleys.
HABITATS
Because moose occupy perhaps 1,350,000 km2 of Alaska's l,s_;_::,ooo
km 2 of very diverse wild land, it is necessary to generalize cc,:;id,~,_c.:Jly
in this discussion of their habitats in the state. The most i::-:?::::ctz::: --
these habitats can most simply be considered as being composed of four
najor "types" occurring relatively distinctly or intergraded. Each "type"
represents a continuum of rather similar communities. Climax cc~:nur:.ities
( utilized are (1) upland v7illmv (Salix spp.) or birch (Betula s;-,;--,.)
) dominated communities and (2) lm·1land bog areas; seral corr.r:mni ::-'.e:s
'-.
ir_c.j_ ~~e:. ·:::
J those created by (3) fire and by (4) glacial or fluvial action. TLL~;
I
\_
discussion will deal Hi th these four types, but it must be ernp~-::,.:;i:.::c:.~: t[:at
the type·s are seldom discrete. are very often mixed and are so::;v'::.::.n..::s
.. ,
I
1
[
[
hybridi::ed ~vith each other or vith the coniferous, mature deciclu0,1s, or
r
L tundra types also abundant in the state. Further, although these fo~::·
[. types are differentially important to moose in various parts of the state,
many moose populations migrate bet~v-een tvo or more types annuall:-'. In
[ contrast, some populations exist entirely, within a sometimes very sm-:.ll
area of only one type community, and survive year-round on it. Ir.. &:Jli-
[ tion to these four types, other taiga communities are very widespr2ad,
[ but support only lmv densities of moose wherever they occur.
[ UPLAND CLIMAX COMMUNITIES
These communities have been little studied but are of great ::_::1:[',:)::"~&::-.c.c::
[ throughout the Alaska and Sev1ard Peninsula, Southcentral Alasl:a (::.nc:· .. ~::'in~,
r the Kenai Peninsula and Matanuska highlands) and southern Interio::-1' ·:::>L.,
L as lvell as on the south slopes of the Brooks Range. They are ess;~nti.::lly
[ timberline shrub complexes containing both birch (predominately :S.c:tLi~
glandulosa and !· Nana) and several species of willov mixed \•Ji ~~~ :,e~_-:::-r:s
r--,
L and forbs, and often intergraded with coniferous taiga communi·;::_ e:s f:oYi~-:.g
[ at lmv-er elevations.
These communi ties occur on relatively \·Jell-drained uplands, ~;e.: ·.-::<~-~--
[ CD::L.'1lencing at 600m or more elevation, out also occurring as 2.o':T c. .. .se.a
level in some areas. The type extends to elevations of 120G-20C>.,
[ depending upon local timberline. Upland streamsides usually su=·:~-r;_
[
the. most dense and tallest vlillmv shrub stands, with )irch dor:tin ... e ..
co::.munities being more common in the drier sites betl-Jeen. '_,:'he ~--.a:. ...
r~ shrub type most often intergrades with alpine tundra or he.s..:h-dry;::s
L
r -
L
r
[
cor.:r.1enitics at higher elevations, and \vith spruce (Picea spp.)-birch t<:,iga
I'
l belm-r. The upland shrub communities often contain scattered white: spr:1::e
c (Picea ~Slauca) at their lmver reaches.
Hanson (1951) likened the birch shrub type ("scrub birch") to
[ cor:u'Ttuni ties described in Nonvay by Nord hagen ( 19 43) as "d>varf heath
shrub on lime -poor rock" and to communi ties in northern Siberia 2::1d
[ north\ves tern Manchuria called "j ernik" or "shrub tundra" by Irr.anisk:_
[
(1950). Birch shrub communities may be created by repeated fires iL .. _::,~uce-
paper birch (Betula papyrifera) stands, or by pecularities of topog~a=
c and elevation alone. Upland willow stands along streams are the r~:.e :~:-:
areas both with and without recent fire history and are primarily ~~:::-o.-·· ___ cts
[ of topography, soils and elevation.
Tables 1 and 2 list floristic characteristics of upland -vJil}.(a n
L and shrub birch stands from Interior and Southcentral Alaska. TL<:.se
c CO!llmunities are often interwoven along stream-cut rolling hills ar-,~~
upland plateaus. Forb sp.ecies present vary considerably by area o£ t: 2
1
L state and specific site, but the woody shrub and heath species listed
are representative of most upland moose habitat in Alaska.
[ Hillmv Comr.mnities -These communities are concentrated at streaD::::.dc;
[ above timberline or in low coastal tundra areas. Shrubs may be clecw~:::;co::·n:;
at higher elevations, growing no more than 20-30 em tall. In the c:::Jr2
[ lush stands at lmver elevations, willoH species are tree-shrubs, cctc:
more thanl.5 m tall. Density of willoHs generally decreases \vit:~ ::.i1cc2asec
[ elevation, but very high densities occur in the lushest stands (T::ble 1).
r Shrub Birch Communities -These communities also occur at and jc:>t be:..oH
iL..-.i timberline, but on drier sites than uplaad Hillow stands. Shrub h2i[:1t:
c
r·~
L
r
[
Table 1. Co1~1position and some characteristics of tHo upland willov1 comrnmities
r in Interior Alaska; modified from Milke 1969.
L
C
[
[
[
[
[
n
L
[
-l
L
[
[
[
[
r
.......
[
r·-
L
Location
Nt. Fairplay
(63° 46 'N 142°13 'H)
Hood River
(63°45 1 K 147°45H)
Elevation
1690m
1100-
1450m
Dominant
Species Present
Salix pulchra
~· _glauca
S. arbusculoides
S. alaxensis
S. denressa
-c
S. scouleriana
Betula nana
Vaccinium uliginosum
V. vitis-idaea
Calamagrostis sp.
Salix alaxensis
§_. _glauca
S. arbusculoides
S. lanata
S. hastata
§_. barclayi
_§_. _pulchra
Picea glauca
Populus trichocarpa
·Betula nana
·vaccinium uliginosum
Shepherdia canadensis
X Ht.
(em)
95
71
141.5
113.8
121.2
68.2
44.8
56.5
58.9
X
Stems/hectare
23,709
13,600
7, c::z
10, ,sL:::;.
6,J_7L
~0>207
34 ~ Sl9
2.1' ]_ )_5
8,070
r
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
r L...J
[
p
l__.
[
--,
L
[
[
[
[
J~
._.
[
r·'
L
Table 2. Hcan composition and cover of 10 upland shrub ("shrub birch") stands
measured in the Nelchina Basin, Alaska by Hanson in 1957 and 1958:
modified from Pegau, 1972. Average cover was measured by the modified
Hult-Sernander scale.
Frequency of
Occurr1nce in F::-eq ~~e:-.. c~,:r of
Average 100-lm Quad-Occurrence in
Cover rats 10 Stands
Betula zlandulosa 2.5 92 100%
Salix .s_rctica 0.2 11 c:,o%
.§_. pulchra o.s 26 70%
s. gl«uca 0.2 6 2.0/~
Vacciniun uliginosum 1.5 73 lOO%
V. vitis-idc.ea 1.6 99 lOO%
Errrpe trus nigrum 1.6 74 100%
Ledum decumbens 1.1 57 90:?',
Diapensia lapponica 0.1 8 30/~
Arctosta~ylos alpina 0.1 2 ~0?
~ octopetala 0.2 8 ')r ,
_jl) /.
Loiseleuria nrocumbens 0.0 1 ... '"':' _iU ?~
Rubus ch2.naemorus 0.1 6 20X
Snirea beauverdiana 0.1 6 10%
Calamagrostis canadensis 0.6 61 90%
:E'estuca altaica 0.4 33 60%
Hierochloe ~ina 0.6 so 80/~
Arctagrostis 1atifo1ia o.o 1 10%
Carex bigelmvii 0.7 48 70%
C. ZJ.ontanensis 0.1 8 10%
c. podocar~ o.o 1 10/~
A~emone narcissif1ora 0.4 31 60~
Artemisia arctica 0.2 17 y----lJ (_.
?2dicularis spp. 0.1 13 SCI~
?olygonTh~ bistorta 0.4 33 sc~;
Ccr~us canadensis o.o 3 2Cc ----:-..':'CcDodiu;-;t annotinum 0.0 1 lC :~-
Ante:--~ia r:10nocephala o.o 4 2C.
Arnica lessingii o.o 2 lC.'
Gent ir:n1c: glauca 0.1 5 ')(, .._.._, ··-
StelL1::-ia laeta o.o 1 lC~
1-fosses 3.9 99 -~00 .
Lichens 4.4 100 lOCX
r
[
!'
L
[
[
[
[
[
D
p
l__.
[
L
[
[
[
[
f "
'-...il
[
,--
L
may v<1ry from 20-30 em to over 2m, dcp~nding upon location and elev.:-.ti.J.:l.
Densities of shrubs Hithin the type are quite variable, but genera.lly
decrease ~vith increased elevation. Dominant and characteristic spe(;ie~~
include Betula glandulosa, Vaccinum uliginosum, 1• vitis-idaea, IA~~(~ '_ tr:1
dect:mbens, Empe trum nigrum, Salix pulchra, Calamagros tis spp. and :~·-,..:s tc: co.
spp. }fusses and lichens are the typical understory plants. Forbs anc
grass species vary 'ivith the site.
Hoose Use -Most upland shrub communities are important to moose in s"L:"::::,er
1 and autu.rnn; however, in some areas of light snowpack they support :::0o:oc:
I
( throughout the year. In the Kenai Peninsula and Matanuska Valley &-:ld r..=lt;..y
!\ areas of Interior Alaska, moose migrate to these areas in June anC:: :u:: '. \ "
) breed in these communities or slightly below in mixed shrub b,ircn-· .. -·ii·:::e
) spruce stands,' and return to upland shrub areas until driven out :..:/ sr:m;
I in November or later. Mature bulls and cows without calves are ~os~
(\ characteristic of these upland areas, for cows with calves and ym.:~-:.:; :, --~s
tend to remain in lowland areas throughout the summer (LeResche l97~a a~d
this volume). In contrast, in some Interior Alaska areas moose des2r~
lo-v7land summering areas and move upward to shrub communities in \·7:~:-. :e::
(LeResche 1973b).
~-lith the exception of temporary aggregations, moose de:1.sity 0 ' se..Lc.o:-:
reaches extreme levels on upland ranges, but densities of 0.8-1.6 2oose
per km 2 are not uncommon over vast upland areas. As a result, a~:-.: because
the range is seldom occupied throughout the year, we knmv of no '~-G .. ' or
insta.nces where upland shrub corrJUunities have been over-utilized ·u:-· me·< .. 2.
One such case possibly exists in the Nelchina Basin, south of the !la<·~:
I·
[
!'
L
[
[
['
_J
[
[
[
n
u
[
---,
L
[
[
[
[
r~
'--"'
r :
L.:
R~mgc, \vhere moose populations have decreased drastically since 1965. A
series of severe winters has occurred, along with a general drying trend,
and many upland shrub stands are in low vigor today (Pegau 1972). Specific
moose-habitat relationships in the area remain unclear, hov1ever.
Upland ranges are permanent refugia for moose populations, and c..re
arnong the most luxurious in Alaska. Due to their topography the:;: hc.:;.-Je
seldom been encroached upon by man, and the limited use receive relc.-:.:ive
to standing biomass insures their continued high-quality. Upla~d r~~62S
are very extensive in some areas. Skoog (1968) estimated that s'.:_-u0 l::<:~::2.l1
and \villow communi ties made up 18. 7% of the 44,800 km 2 of moose a:·1d car :_c :.J::
range he studied in the Nelchina Basin. Only a fev1 moose v7inte:::· in '::·r-,es2
ranges in normal years. During years of light snmvfall, moose re:·:·,a~:: in
upland areas well into winter, thereby relieving pressure on hes.vi.l:>' usee:
lmvland Hintering areas (LeResche 1973b).
Forage quality on upland ranges is sometimes superior to th.c:.-::
fire-created seral vrinter range. Washed rumen contents from ei<,~: t :.·.::.cse
collected from upland shrub ranges on the Kenai Peninsula in Nove~c.b2r,
1970 (LeResche and Davis, unpubl.) had higher protein ( 6. 5 ::!!}_ 6 .l g%),
caloric value (245 ::!!}_ 230 cal/lOOg) and digestible dry matter C.( .3 .Y§.
15.2% in bovine rumina) than those from six moose collected o:: e~jc: .. ::e;~·:c:
seral birch ranges 30 km aHay. Identified rumina on the upla::::: rar:~>:-:
were 59% Salix spp., 33% Betula spp., 3% Aspen (Populus trem;.;~_::::.,<es.
5% forbs by volume. On the seral rar.ge, identified pland parL.,-::l.es <:·:e:::.:::
39% Salix spp., 36% Betula spp., 6% aspen, 14% Vaccinium vitis-L~ae::. ~=tnc
3% dried leaves.
r
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
L
[.
[
[
[
r
[
r~
L
-.........--
10\fLA:m CLHL'\.."( CO~l}HJNITIES
This hnbi tat type contains a broad spectrum of communities particula-cly
important to moose during summer. In addition, all the major calvi~g con-
centrations ~"e knmv of in Alaska occur in boggy loHland climax cor:r.-_uni ties.
These communities are an integral part of taiga vegetational complexes
throughout Interior and Southcentral Alaska.
( Extensive lowlands, locally referred to as "flats" or "muskez," occ·Gr
~
L on broad alluvial plains from the south slopes of the Brooks Ran;;~ to :.Le
southern coastal forests, and from the Alaska-Canada border nearly to :·:-.e
Bering and Chukchi Seas (Hahrhaftig 1965, Johnson and Hartman 1969).
Approximately 30 percent of this area is forested, while the remaining
land consists of bogs, shrub thickets, and alpine tundra (Viereck) ms).
Surface vegetation patterns are closely related to topography, dra:::_na~~e,
presence or absence of permafrost, and past fire history.
f
Surface features in loHland areas frequently include extensive L~ooci
plains with little relief, meander scars and oxbow lakes, terraces, ar:::;.
alluvial outwash deposits (Black 1958, Hahrhaftig 1965). Loess, sc:nd)
and outHash of Quaternary age, organic deposits formed in bogs, c.nd
recently deposited alluvium frequently overlay a micaceous schist bedrock
(D'..Itro and Payne 1957, Viereck, ms). Forest soils are generally shallow
>vi th poorly developed profiles. Piedmont streams, many of glacial origin,
change from braided to tightly meandering tributaries as they en~cr lm-1er
elevations.
r
c·
r
L
c
c
[
[
[
D
n
L
D
c
L
[
c
[
rl
......
[
r~
L
Pen:1~1tl"O.St, or penwnc.ntly frozen 8rOtll1d, is a widespread phc;:omenon
throughout much of the Alaskan taiga. BetHeen the Alaska Range and the
Brooks Range permafrost occurs in all areas except south facing slopes
and recently deposited alluvium. South of the Alaska Range permafrost i3
sporadic in occurrence, and is found only in bogs and on north facing
slopes (Viereck, ms). Permafrost affects vegetation patterns by prevent-
ing lateral movement and dowm1ard percolation of soil Hater (Benninr;hoff
1952). Thus, permafrost results in saturated soils or standing water
throughout much of the taiga.
Regional distribution of vegetation types and permafrost in lo:1l2,·,,d
areas are closely interrelated. Insulation provided by black spruce (Picea
r::ariana) and bog vegetation prevents melting of permafrost during sun~.·,er
months, and permafrost governs climax vegetation during the course of
succession (Benninghoff 1952, Drury 1956). Disjunct stands of si"n:-c-~Js
and deciduous trees scattered throughout Alaskan lowlands are freG_•.,en.::ly
due to burning of climax vegetation, which results in lmvering of ~:er-. .s-
frost tables and formation of a substrate temporarily favorable tc sc0-
climax vegetation (Viereck, personal co~munication).
Geologically and vegetatively the flats of Interior Alaska consis~
of treeless or nearly treeless bogs and more or less fo.rested areas sur-
rounding or occurring within the bogs. Drury (1956) and Viereck (1970a,
l970b) have discussed lmvland forest succession and origin of bogs 3l'Jng
braided or meandering streams in Interior Alaska. Freshly deposi.-::2d
alluvium is first colonized by willoH or alder (Alnus spp.), and L.tt:.-;:
by balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera). An understory of lmv shrubs,
horsetails (Equisetum spp.) and white spruce seedlings may develop be~2ath
r
..._ _ _.:
c
r
L
[
[
[
[
c
[
r
u
c
1
L
c
[
[
[
r
L-'
C
r·'
L
the poplars. As the Hhite spruce mature, an organic ground layer of
mosses, herbs, and low shrubs develops, permafrost forms and after 200 to
300 years, the substrate becomes more favorable to black spruce than to
white spruce.
Local disturbance of the insulating organic layer in black spruce
forests may result in shallow thawing of the permafrost, water accur-.u:i_ation,
and bog formation (Benninghoff 1952, Drury 1956). Development and e.x-
pansion of bogs is frequently indica ted by angular growth of trees cue· to
soil instability. The resulting vegetation over extensive lowlanc are&s
becomes an intricate mosaic of black spruce forests, bogs, shrubs, ~nc
I
sub-climax hardwood communities, as \vell as numerous intermediate s::afc::::;.
Characteristics -Floristics of northern lm.;rlands have been report::::,_ 1::-
Ritchie (1959) and Larsen (1965) in subarctic Canada, Hanson (lJ5}_, E~:..)
in western Alaska, Drury (1956) in the upper Kuskokwim River region of
,Alaska, and Johnson and Vogel (1966) in the Yukon Flats of Alaska. In
addition, Anderson (1959) , Hulten (1968), and Viereck and Little (:1.9 72)
have described the circumpolar distribution of trees, shrubs, and herbs
found in Alaska.
Recent alluvial deposits on lmvland floodplains throughou::. :L::-.::._r:::.c::
.Alaska are generally colonized first by horsetails (Equisetum a:cvc::_,~se>,
grasses (Calamagrostis canadensis), \·lillows (Salix alaxensis, S. c.rouscu-
loides, ~· bebbiana), and alder (Alnus tenuifolia).
As balsam poplar and later, white spruce or mixed VJhite spr'~cc-p2?::r
birch become established, herbs such as \vintergreen (PyroJ.a secu:--: ::) c:.L::
fire',;eed (Enilobium angustifolium), and low shrubs such 23 rose (T~c~:a
acicularis), currant (Ribes triste), and highbush cranbe.,-ry (Vibur:'~;:-'1
edule::) appear.
r
[
r'
L
[
[
[
[
c
c
fl
L
[
---.,
L
[
[
[
[
r
..._..
[-,_ --
...
r-~
L
Accompanying the replacement of w·hi te spruce and birch by black spruce
is a gradual increase in the sphagnum moss (Sphagnum capillaceum, ~·
girgensobnii, _§_. fuscus, and _§_. rubellum) cover and growth of a dense
shrub layer of blueberry (Vaccinium uliginosum), Labrador tea (Ledu~
groenlandicum, L. decumbens) and birch (~. glandulosa, ~· ~).
A dense ground cover of sphagnum and low shrubs, along with '\v.i.ll0':·7
thickets (~. pulchra, _§_. bebbiana), and -.videly spaced paper birch~ blade
spruce, or tamarack (Larix laricina) may replace stands of black sp:;.-:.rc,:::.
The recurring process of bog formation and subsequent reforestation :ias
b.een described in detail by Drury (1956).
P~l stages of bog development, from open water to black spruce forest,
are found in Alaska lmvlands. Sphagnum mosses, sedges (Car ex spp. and
Eriophorun spp.) and pond lilies (Nyphar polysepalum md Nymphaea _.:·:..:::_::r~_c-:)29)
are connnon in open ~vater, while other sedges (£. aguatilis) and ho:cse:L::_.:i_s
·(E. fluviatile, E. palustre) are found along margins of ponds and s:-:aL~cr:·:
flmv-ing water. Bog shrubs, such as bog rosemary (Andromeda polifo1i,l),
Labrador tea, bog blueberry (Vaccinium uliginosum), swamp cranberry
(0-.~Cvcoccus microcarpus), leather-leaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata), cloud-
berry (Rubus chamaemorus), dwarf birch (Betula~) and shrub D:'_:c;:::-_
(~. glandulos a) , along with sphagnum mosses, are connnon on moist g::::: ~m::::.
Tanan2. Flats, Interior Alaska -The vegetation of the Tanana Flats, a.
7200 km 2 alluvial lowland lying innnediately south of Fairbanks, ALtsk<::.,
r-,as been recently studied (Coady and Simpson, unpubl.). The area -·
bour..ded on the south by the rugged Alaska Range, on the no:cth and e,-.st
by the glacial Tanana River, and on the west by the glacial Hood Ri>.2r;
and is part of the much larger Tanana-Kuskokwim physiographic provi.:cce
described by Wahrhaftig (1965) •
Surface deposits from glacial streams flm·l :ing into the Tanana ?lats
on the south form a belt of broad coalescing fans that grade from coarse
sand and gravel near the mountains to fine sand and silt at lower e:.eva-
tions, Material manteling the eastern and northern portion of the Fla~s
has been deposited by the Tanana River (Andreasen, et al., 1964). 2xcept
for scattered lmv hills of granite, ultramafic rocks, and possibly
Precambrian schist, the Flats are an area of little relief (Andrea:~en,
et al. 1964). The entire region is underlain by permafrost (Blac~: 2..952~
1\ahrhaftig 1965), and drainage is poor, resulting in numerous snall,
shallovJ ponds, extensive bogs, and meander scars.
A vegetation type map of the Tanana Flats based on black an·:t 'J1:iL:
aerial photographs (scale 1": 1320') was completed in spring 1972 (?:l.gt::c2
2). Five major types were identified: herbaceous bog, heath bog, tall
shrub, deciduous tree, and conifer tree.
Herbaceous bogs occur primarily in the northern portion of the Flats
and cover approximately 7 percent of the area. Vegetation is doDinated
by ~~ergent species, and live trees and shrubs are totally absent (Table
3). Stagnant or slm-1ly flov1ing water depths vary seasonally, ran;inc; from
several em to several m after spring run-off. Bog bottoms consist af
a r::eter or more of dead and decaying vegetation, and permafrost de;:;-.:hs
are presumably -v1ell belm·l the upper surface of organic material.
Heath bogs occupy approximately 40 percent of the Jand." Dor:;~:12.nt
vegetation consists of mosses and shrubs, although scattered trees ~.nc.
various herbs rooting on precipi taus sedge hu111mocks are common Cc.::·.; ~t.e ·~) •
Eoth mineral soil and permafrost tables occur within a meter of the Sl.;:i:'ace,
r
<-~
[ ~;cnsonal tlH.M may extend to greater depths in some areas. Soil
)"'~"' '' -.-. , ·-:""' T .. ,_,
L Jj
[ tl:c Flats but are most frequent along rivers, streams, sloughs and al1ong
margins of ponds and meander scars. Recently burned areas may alsc s~pport c ,, t<l~Ll sh:r.-ub communities. Vegetation ranges from pure to Plixed stands of
~-;illmv and alder ui th a dense understory of mosses, herbs, and lov7 shr~bs
[
'
in poorly drained sites (Table 5). Exposed mineral soil, loH moist~re:
[ content, and absence of permafrost are common on recent alluvial de;Jc:_;i ts,
\·7~lile a thick organic layer, impeded drainage, and high permafrost tables
r~ are found in other areas.
__.
Discontinuous pure or mixed stands of paper birch, aspen, or l;a}c;;;:;_"""
[ poplar occur on approxiT'1ately 8 percent of the Flats, particularly or.
" slightly elevated land and on coarse river alluvium. Understory vegetatic.:-,
L; ranges from a dense herbaceous cover in cottonwood. (Populus balsamifera)
[ stands to mixed herbs and lm..r shrubs in aspen and birch stands. Scattered
Hillm1s and alders are common among cottom..rood communities (Table 6).
1
L Well-drained mineral soil lies close to the surface and permafrost taoles
[
'
are deep or non-existent.
Scattered conifer stands in the \vestern portion and extensive lc-;,
[ dense black spruce and occasional tamarack forests in the souther:1 area
cover approximately 35 percent of the Flats. Mature >vhi te spruce :=ores ·:::s
L vj_ ti-1 a ground vegetation of low shrubs and mosses are common on elc:w:. -.::ed
[
areas near streams. Black spruce forests underlain by a dense ms.t. o£
r:wss, herbs, and loH shrubs grm..r in poorly drained areas (Table 7). ~::oil
r orgc..nic layer, moisture content, and permafrost tables range fror: lm in
L..J
young uhi te spruce stands to high in black spruce and tamarack st<;.nds.
L
,--
L
r
[
r'
L
[
[
[
[
[
c
fl
u
[
L
[
[
[
[
r
"---'
[
r~
L
}foo~c Use -The seasonal importance to moose of local flatlands soL;t'h 0r
the Brooks Range is variable. Lmvland areas , by virtue of their abur:dant
herbaceous vegetation, are generally important summer ranges for moose of
all sex and age groups. Furthermore, interspersion of escape cover ·Hi th
prir,.1e feeding habitat create favorable calving areas for large nuni~ers of
moose (Rausch and Bratlie 1965, Bishop 1969).
In the Tanana Flats moose commonly feed in herbaceous bogs fro:n
spring thmv to late summer. HoHever, greatest use of this habitat a;.;·,:.c:.a:: .. ·s
to be during early to mid-summer. During late summer moose may feed nore
frequently on herbaceous and woody browse in heath bog and tall s~rub
comnunities.
Generally, the Tanana Flats do not seem to be good winter ;-.ncs 2
range, and there is large scale emigration of animals during fal:: .. c:L •.•
early Hinter. Although several species of willows are Hidely sea~ c:e:c-:::.d
throughout portions of the Flats, most plants are old and extrer::c.~_·/
decadent. Apparently, changes in local edaphic factors (eg. soil :e~pera-
·ture, moisture, and organic content) due to the dynamic nature cf ·jo':"_;
formation frequently create substrates unfavorable to continued ;::: . .-o~-rc.t,
of tall shrub and other sub-climax communi ties. However, vigoroc.::3 g:::c. -·.
of shrJbs occurs in burned areas and on well drained recent ce;_-:.os:~ :::s .:. __ c:.~::
sone streams, and these areas do support modest numbers of moos2 c:uri'-'-6 \·.'L·, ~2..:.
l GLACIAL MlD RIPARIAN SERAL COMMUNITIES
These predominately willm·7 communities are key winter ranges iL
r::uch of Alaska and are the only habitat consistently occupied by ;·oo,:;E::
on the North Slope and Arctic coastal plain. They differ from f:;_,-e-cr ..
I r
[
r
L
[
[
[
[
c
c
n
L
[
L
[
[
[
[
r
'--'
[
r--,
L
scr<~l co::mmnities in that nany are constantly renewed by erosion, fl.ocding
and/ or ice scouring. Thus they provide relatively permanent (if dy:1aro.::.c)
noose range.
Most large Interior and Southcentral Alaska rivers create man;r sqaa.re
miles of riparian ~villmv communities. The Yukon, Kuskohtim, Tanana,
Porcupine, Kobuk,. Koyukuk, Chandalar, Susitna, Copper artd scores o[
src.aller drainages are all lined \vith these communities. Arctic rivers,
notably the Colville, Chandler, Anaktuvuk, Sagavanirktok and Cannin~,
like>vise have created riparian willow stands which have allov1ed moose ~o
disperse to the Arctic Ocean. Glacially scoured and still active clelL.s
and out>vash plains such as at Yakutat, Redoubt Bay and Cordova sup_1crt
similar communities (cf: Cooper 1942, Crocker and Dickson 1957, Crm: ESS)
and sustain substantial moose populations.
Throughout Alaska,· glacial;_riparian stands occur on predomir:<e:ly
coarse gravel substrate on riverine and glac{al flood plains. s 2.~. :~ ~:
· ala-xensis is the dominant shrub species, and is associated vli th s2ver2l
Hillc\·7 species, most notably S. arbusculoides , and occasionally Hi:::--, . -
Alnus· crispa or Populus bals&:nifera (in Interior and Southcentral _t,:._as:·
Rerbs and grasses form the understory. Adjoining these co~~unities OL
more poorly drained soils further from the river in tundra arec.s "=' -,-• ~ .:;.... __ ,.___
·Salix· pulchra, ..§_. glauca, ~· lanata dominated stands, similar to ti1cse
described as upland shrub types. Hanson (1951) describes such co::c;:· .. ::-.:f. :.:~es
frOB the SeHard Peninsula, and we have studied them on the Arctic c.~asi.c:-::..
Plc.:i.n and in the Interior. Hillow heights in these stands vary fr~:::.
1-7m, depending upon the site.
~ .....
In the Interior, riparian ~.;rillow stands commonly grade into Balsa~c-t
poplnr and white spruce communities (Viereck 1970a); whereas, in tundr2
;weas 'tvillm.;r stnnds typicnlly adjoin terraced heath or dwarf shrub
communities (Spetzman 1959).
Ch:1r.::cteristics -Tables 8-10 present floristic and other characteristics
of riparian ~villow stands in Interior and Arctic Alaska. The Tanana
River stand (Table 8) is on an alluvial island in a broad, braided glacial
river, and is representative of these dense stands along all major =Jterior
rivers which may flood and ice-scour annually. The Chena River stand
(Table 9) is on a gravel bank on the upper reaches of a smaller, clear
stream, and represents a less extreme situation where flooding is less
persistent.
The Kongakut River stand, on the eastern Arctic north slope (FigL-:2 2,
Table 10), is representative of the clunped feltleaf (.§_. alaxensis)
co~uunities found on coarse gravel bars of these clear braided stre~~s ~~
they flov1 onto the Arctic coastal plain. These streams normally flood only
in spring, and many produce considerable aufeis in most years. Bliss
and Cantlon (1957) describe intergrading yound and decadent fel:::ec:.c
vlillo;·l communities occurring between gravel bar herb communities ace
terrace communities. The chief differences are height and vigor of tLe:
dor.:inant S. alaxensis plants (l-1.6m in young communities; up to 7m, -.:·~Ltl-:.
"lany dead stems, in decadent conununities) and a shift from herb (t:';-ic: __ _:__--·
Luninus arcticus, and Deschampsia caespitosa) to moss understory.
Y:oose Use -Riparian vlillot·l communi ties are the year-round hab:L ;:;:: ::s of
moose at the edges of their range, (in the Arctic, for example) and
inportant ~·linter habitats \vherever they occur. In addition, they serve
r
...__..;
[
r
l ~
[
[
[
[
r --'
[
fl
L-'
[
L
[
_j
L
[
f '
'-"
[
~·
Table 8. Sh::ub characteristics of a riparian \villovl community on an islc:.nd
in the Tanana River, Interior, Alaska (64° 47'N 14r 45'1-7; elevation
140m). Hodified from Milke, 1969.
Species
Salix alaxensis
S. lasiandra
S. interior
S. mvrtillifolia
S. niphoclada
Total Avc:.ilable Brm.;rse:
X Height
(em)
131.3
52.5
69.3
77.3
70.0
Stems/
hectare
1,497
499
8,485
3,244
14,725
Oven-dried ~it:.
"available brm-1se11 *
(g/he c tar e.)
36,850
19 '9 80
15,100
131,870
203":-~c:o
-----------------------------------------------------
* All t•vigs above minimum browsed height were clipped at mean brmvsed di.::~m,::te:
for the species.
r
c
r
L
[
c
[
[
n .~
c
fl
u
c
..,
l
c
[
[
c
r·,
Lj
[
T.:1ble 9. Characteristics of a riparian •villmv stand on the Chena River,
Interior Alaska (approx. 64°55 1 Nl47°W; elevation 200m). Modified
from Viereck, 1970z.
Salix alaxensis
~eudocordata
Rosa acicularis
Alnus incana
V:i:'bmn u""' e d u 1 e
Rubus idaeus
Populus balsamifera ( 3.8cm)
Picea glauca ( 3.8cm)
Populus balsamifera ( 3.8cm)
Picea glauca ( 3. Scm)
Betula _papyrifera ( 3.8cm)
Gat:ium boreale
Poa aluina
£Pil~~~ustifolium
A~=c~is~a tilesii
Agrostis scabra
Agrouvron macrourum
Stellaria laeta
Wilkelosia ohvsodes
Arabis l'Jrata
Hertensia
Cal&~agrostis canadensis
Hosses and lichens
Frequency of
Occurrence (%)
60
10
40
10
10
10
40
40
40
40
20
10
10
10
10
10
10
10-80
~
·~.
X
Cover
(%) Stems /'::.ec tare
15 1,220
1 40
3
6 540
2
1
420
40
7,280
10,660
.540
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
21
r
r
n
L. Table 10. Characteristics of a riparian willow stand on the Kongakut River,
[
..
L
[
E "
r
_J
[
n
L
[
--,
L
[
[
[
[
.
r
..._.
[
r-·-
i
L~
Arctic North Slope, Alaska (69°25'Nl41°30'W; elevation 300n).
Salix ala.xensis
.§_. myrtiliflora
s. reticulata
.§_. glauca
Arctostaphylus alpinus
Astragalus spp.
Equisetum variegata
Solidago nultiradiata
Calamag1·os tis spp.
Dryas integrifolia
Ranunculus sp.
Pvrola grandiflora
Pedicularis caoitata
Achillea :.)orealis
Festuca altica
Lupinus arcticus
Polenonium spp.
Mosses
X Cover (%)
5
1
1
28
48
5
4
1
2
2
5
1
1
1
2
1
1
60
(mean height ca. 2m)
r
·c
r
L
[
[
r L
[
c
c
n
u
r
L.l
.......,
L
[
[
[
[
r~
L
L
r~,
L
[
as co.lvicg and summering areas for moose in Interior Alaska. Since these
stands arc relatively permanent features, they serve as reservoirs from
lvhich moose populations can expand into ne\vly-burned areas and as avenues
for dispersal into new range.
Hovement into riparian willow habitats from upland and lowland sm:uner
I .
i ranges usually occurs in November or later, apparently depending upon
snow characteristics. During harsh w·inters, river "bottoms" bec.one.
yarding areas for high densities of moose. When deep snov7 persists,
overbrm.J"sing may occur, and these areas have been the scenes of t:,c mos!:
spectacular moose die-offs recorded in Alaska. Where extensive bur::ec
areas are lacking, riparian conrnunities are the habitat of last resort
for i.J"intering moose. Their extent and vigor ultimately detemine a;:
\vhat level moose populations will persist in the area.
FIP-E CREATED SERAL CONHUNITIES
Fire-mediated habitats are the most ephemeral of Alaskan moose hab~-
tats; yet, they support the greatest population explosions and ar::o:-:g
greatest densities of moose in the state. The earliest specific pt.:bli·:::a-
tions concerning moose management in Alaska (Spencer and Chatelain 1953,
Leopold and Darling 1953a and b, Chatelain 1951, 1952) correctly stressed
the correlation between dense moose populations and forest fires.
The ecological effects of fires in Alaska are extremely conplc:·: (cf.
Lutz 1956, Slaughter et al. 1971, Viereck ms) and cannot be consi(~crcl.i
in detail here. Lutz (1956) presented a diagranrnatic representatit::.·, of
norr:1al courses of post-fire succession in Alaskan taiga. Vierec:z ~ns)
modified the chart and we reproduce his chart here (Figure 4). ;·.E.
_r
I
_r
L
[
[
[
[
c
c
n
L
[
..---,
L
[
[
[
[
r
L
L
[
course <'ll: succession and the seral community's value to moose are determined
by a multitude of site (soils, temperature, moisture, slope and exposure),
fire (severity, mode of travel, duration) and miscellaneous (natural
reseeding sources, size of openings created) factors. The general successional
courses producing maximum benefits to moose populations are those involving
paper birch-willov1-aspen shrub thickets.
Fires have probably always been common in Alaska, but have incre::.s::.C.
in frequency and area burned since modern settlement (Hardy and Fr.:.:nks
1963). Viereck (ms) maintains there are very few Interior forests that
survive burning long !7nough to reach what can be considered clina:,: s L.;:::-e:.
Barney (1971) suggests that 600,000 to 1,000,000 ha burned annua::..:,_y Lc.:::
1900-19!+0. Even >vi th modern fire control, a mean of approximately 4C~, 000
ha annually have burned bet,veen 19Lf0-1969 (Barney 1971). The-genc_·al
trend in the past three decades has been toward an increase in nuubers of
fires (1,138 in the 1940's, 2,583 in the 1950's and 2,380 in the lS60 1 s
:.n Interior Alaska) but a decrease in the total area burned (5,018,000
ha in the 1940's, 4,330,000 ha in the 1950's, 2,590,000 ha in the l960 1 s)
c:nd the area burned per fire. Increased fire control capabili tic:s :1ac.ce
thus perhaps decreased the benefits of civilization to moose.
Characteristics -Several factors detemine the impact a fire-cre<O~ed
successional community will have on moose populations: (1) species co·:-~:·o-
sition, (2) size of burn and per-area standing biomass and production of
available brov1se, (3) rate of attaining a) above snov and b) above moose-
reach heights and (4) amount and distribution of mature communitiGs
~
··~'
,.....,
I' I
L~
n
~
'
[
I
[
c
[]
n
u
[
L
[
I
L..
[
[
I
i
'-'
L
r~
L
ren<,-!.nin:~, divers:l ty of scral coramunities created and dis tributio.: of
r:>atu:re cor1t:11.mities rePJaininr, (e.g.: "edge effect" created).
Conposition -The species re-invading burned areas in Alaska I'l.ost
often ·tend to be the same species present before the fire (Figure 4). /
This results from re-sprouting or growth of root suckers (Spencer and
Hakala 1964, Viereck ms). Stands are often nearly monotypic in shrub
species (cf. Table 11), uith birch or aspen (on the warmest, driest sites)
predominating. Spruce encroachment occurs usually slowly (Vierec3· ms)
in the Interior, but sometimes almost immediately (e.g.: on some stands
on the Kenai Peninsula). Although willov7S are often among the first
recolonizers, they generally do not achieve great numbers or production,
perhaps because of consistent utilization by moose. Aspen may be si<:ilarly
affected. Spencer and Hakala (1964) described how moose and plar.t cc::-,?eti-
tion had altered the proportion of aspen in the Kenai (1947) burn. It
apparently decreased from 96.5 percent of the standing shrub bimcc_, s ~ :-.
1952 (Spencer and Chatelain 1953) to less than one percent in 196~· (T2~le
11). \-let lm1land and permafrost sites are usually less thoroughly ou-c:::.ed
(Viereck ms) and thus may rapidly recover by vegetative reproduction t:;
a co1:1position similar to that existingbefore the fire. Hillov7S, bluc·:::erry
and d\varf birch tend to be more numerous in these stands.
The exact .composition of species recolonizing a burn may depeild u:;on
the timing of the fire relative to plant phenology (Viereck ms). Hillmr
species produce seeds· that 'are viable for only a matter of weeks, and
various species produce seeds at different times of year. Further so~e
species (paper birch, Hhi te spruce) produce "bumper" seed crops o;::_.:;_y .:':-tee
in several years, ,(Viereck ms) and the year the burn occurs migh:: :~hu::;
affect species composition of the resulting seral community.
r
[
Table 11. Characteristics of shrub standing crop and production on Kenai ~:urn
r t\venty years after the 1947 fire. Modified from Seeme1 1969.
L
[
-,
L
[
[
r
--"
[
n
L
[
--,
L
[
[
[
[
~~
I
L-'
[
r,
L
Species
Betula papyrifera
" "
II 11
" 11
II "
ropulus tremuloides
-~~--11
11 II
" II
" 11
Viburnum edu1e
" "
Salix spp.
-11-11
11 I!
ll l1
n II
Alnus crisva
Betula nana
7otals:
Stems/ Annual ?roduction
Community hectare g/hectare
Dense Birch 80,046 09,3f:-'(3
Medium Birch 47,221 3:5,987
Thin Birch 34,381 249,J::..6
Spruce-birch 19,296 118, ~.l8
Spruce Regrowth 6, 775 ......... ')?(.. ..):J, __ J
Dense Birch 237 l..G2
Medium Birch 339 3! .. ::.
Thin Birch 541 ,'_) /:;
Spruce-birch 200 n.:,.
Spruce Regrowth 168 ~2-4
Dense Birch 114 lC.
Spruce-birch 89 "_;,I:_J
Dense Birch 1,641 ~~-' .::: _j 3
Medium Birch 1,196 ?. -: ---! ':{
•J:. ..:.........-' ..J
Thin Birch 692 3, ;t.; 7
Spruce-birch 469 2,255
Spruce Regrowth 652 2, J)9
Thin Birch 319 ~··-=-3
Spruce Regrowth 8, 772 9,~·cs
Dense Birch 82,038 I -.
.:..., .... ~ ' )I ,-_. l~ --:
Hedium Birch 48,756 2~~2' _:. ::.::s
Thin Birch 35,933 25!-7,656
Spruce-birch 20,054 120,687
Spruce Regrmvth 16,367 46,56 7
r
[
r
L
[
c
[
[
ro
[
p
L
[
L
[
[-,
-~
[
[
['
L
[
r-
L
There is little detailed information directly relating opecies co~r;;-;o-
si tion of burn regro'Vlth to subsequent moose population densities. Em:cver,
observations suggest that the higher the proportion of first, willoH, and
second, birch shrubs produced, the greater the moose densities that ~v::..::_l
result during early years of succession.
Production -Biomass production of shrubs can be prodigious fo1loHing
burns in Alaska. Seemel's (1969) studies 21 years after the Kenai (l':JL7)
burn indicate annual production of nearly 500 kg/ha in the densest sh~ub
B. papyrifera stands (Table 11). Standing crop is also large, 1·7:!_t::r e;~,.OOO
shrub stems/ha estimated in the most dense stands. Both product~o~ a~~
standing crop, as 'tvell as composition, vary considerably with ir.~i.vic'-'"''~-
stand (cf.: Table 11), and thus the proportions of various conmu:~.-i_':ie.:; 2~:c
variously-productive stands in a burn also influence moose numbs I.-:-·.
Productivity and quantity of available browse are seldom li:~,i ting
factors to moose densities in large burns in Alaska. In the Kenai (~947)
burn of 127,600 ha, Seemel (1969) estimated that more than 8 moose/b./ in
a 2.6 kn2 enclosure used only 18.3 -22.8% of the estimated annual s:-,rub
production, depending upon community. Spencer and Chatelain (::_953) i:-:
?
contrast, had estimated that utilization by only 1. 7 moose per lc.:-o:~ :::l~e
sc.:::1e burn in 195 2 was 45 percent of the annual production of aS.:''--":--.., ::!.e:l
virtually the only shrub present. Since then plant production hc.s e:-:c~eded
noose production in relative terms, even though moose densities :'-c~::1i.:-2d
the highest level ever recorded. Spencer and Hakala (1964) SUf:;'c5tc:.
that adequate densities of moose might retard succession in scr~,:;_ sL.::·-~b
habitats under certain conditions. He feel that these densities 2re
seldom reached and never persist. Although moose may alter relat:':ve
r
[
r1
L
[
[
[
t
[
0
n
u
c
L
[
[
[
[
r~
f
L>
,-:
LJ
r···
L
ab\ll:dance of species in seral comrrmni ties, we know of no ins tancc:: VThc;:e
they h3ve retarded succession over a large burned area. In the case
of the Kenai burn, moose populations appeared to peak at the very high
level of 4-6 moose/km2 in the most productive habitat, at about t:12 sa.::1e
tirae Seemel made his estimates. Hi thin four 2. 6 km2 enclosures, popu-
2 lations remained relatively static at 4.6 -5.4 moose/km (before calving)
over a three-year period, and utilization probably did not exceed Sec.·1el' s
estimate (LeResche and Davis 1971).
Isolated smaller burns serving as 1nnter concentration areas for
moose are sometimes retarded in succession and, on occasion, "over-utilized"
by immigrant moose. Succession on the 1320 ha Kenai Lake burn (1959) :1as
been effectively retarded by wintering moose, 1vith most shrubs bei::g oroHsed
to snouline annually. This burn is unusual in that it is situated ire t·he
midst of nearly-mature range that lrintered many moose until the la~e ...... ;.sols,
and is about 20 km froo the nearest edge of the larger Kenai burr. ( lS ~ 7) •
Because fires are frequent throughout most of Alaska, small burns are
often near other burns of various ages, and are therefore not subjected
to intensive use by large concentrations of moose from a vast area.
Furthennore, small isolated burns do not produce-widespread moose po-r:ula-
tion explosions sufficient to alter succession. Thus, in most cases,
post-burn succession in large burned areas seems to proceed at a r2te
little different from what it 1..:rould in the absence of moose. The co~_:.c::. ,:;
of St.!ccession may \vell be altered, hm..:rever.
Rate of Grm..:rth -The sooner recolonizing shrubs achieve a height
that makes them available to moose during 1vinter, the sooner moos;.c; pc~;u-
lation explosions occur. Conversely, the more rapidly shrubs matt-:.:e :'_;:to
' ~-
.r
[
_,-,
L
C
c
[
[
n ,-'
c
n
u
c
---,
L
[
[
[
[
r'
u
~--~
u
tree:::;, t:1e shorter is the productive life of the burn. Spe:1cer a:1d
Ch~ltelnin (1953) estimated that the Kenai burn (1947) produced significant
brmvse by 1950, and that by 1953 moose had increased four-fold. 1/foosE:
densities peaked on the burn about 1967-1969, and may have experiencE:d
the first stages of a decline in the winter of 1971-1972; however, they
remain very high today.
Rates of grmvth differ bet\veen burns and within large burns, depending
upon species present and site and climatological variables. Fi t;-;i:1 the
Kenai (1947) burn, heights of !• papyrifera plants in adjacent stands ranged
from lm to almost 7m in 1970. We do not know whether some sites \7er.:::
recolonized by paper birch later than others or whether grmvth rates alone
account for the differences.
Hakala, et al. (1971) predicted that brmvse would "continue to i:-.p:.::-cYe11
on areas burned on the Kenai Peninsula (1969) for 23-25 years af~2r :~e
burn, as has been the case with the 1947 Kenai burn area. Moose ~e~~~=~25
could be expected to remain high for this period, and then decline as
happened after a series of fires in the 1880's and 1920's (Spencer and
Hakala 1964). The limited information available, then, suggests that
the "useful life" of a burn as moose habitat in Alaska is usually less
than 50 years, and that moose densities pe,ak 20.,..,25 years after tL:c: ·r;ur::-..
Sh_ape of Burn, Diversity and "Edge Effect" -The degree of :~.r~ter-
spersion of communities, or amount of "edge effect", produced b:' ,., ::ire
is very important in determining the fire's effect on moose popc:~_at: -::-..s.
Gre:at discontinuity of burning is desirable because it provides, ~: l_,
cover (mature) habitat close to feeding habitat, (2) increased vc:ri,2ty
of alternate forage species and (3) staggered maturation rates c::
individual stands.
--.
J
'
--~
"""'!·
--"'
-,
___.
[
E
n _ _.
0
!9
L ...
[
--,
l
[
[
[
[
f-,
'--'
[
r-~
L
T1:c forest edge ecotone allmvs moose both to invade a heterogeneous
burn sooner than a large homogeneous burn and to achieve higher year-round
densities. The distance a moose will continually move from cover into
open feeding areas likely varies with season, age, sex, reproductive status,
snmv characteristics and a multitude of other factors. It appears certain,
hmvever, that increased mature forest edge will hasten establishnent 01:
moose in a ne'v burn. The rate of moose increase on the Kenai ( 194 7) burn,
described by Spencer and Chatelain (1953) as 400% in 5 years, Has pro:-,ably
near the maximum attainable because of the tremendous amount of ed;~e
created. It is problematical whether immig:i:'ation from nearby &reas '.:;.::.c
a significant effect (leResche 1973b).
Once the moose population is established, small stands of mature
tinber (30-40m tall birch, Hhi te spruce and aspen in the 1947 Ker-:ai burn)
provide year-round escape cover and 'vinter refugia from deep snm.'. :;:·;1
addition, these stands provide alternate food sources that may :)e of
considerable importance to the maintenance of high moose densitie~3.
LeResche and Davis (1973) showed that Vaccinium vitis-idaea plar,·:s \·7ere
important to moose in winter and remained available more consiste;.-:.tly in
nature stands than in adjacent seral stands on ·the Kenai.
Shrub-forest ecotones are not the only important edges crea=ed by
fires. Shrub-sedge and shrub-aquatic ecotones are also important at
various times of year. Brush bordering summer feeding bogs, for exc:.::ple,
car, be excellent cover habitat for young calves (LeResche 1966), De::~ c.
shrubs bordering small, drying potholes is preferred habitat for ::,ch.~ .. ts
in late fall, v7hen they dig craters in snow to feed on cured sedge :::..eaves.
,
""'
r
[
The optimum amount of edge and/or the optimum size and shape of indi-
r
L vidual burned stands in Alaska is difficult to determine because moose
c
[
C
[
n '----'
c
n
L
c
--, u
c
[
c
[
r
LJ
[
r-~
i u
densities depend upon so many variables. The Kenai burn (1947), hoHever,
appears to represent, if not the ideal, at least the most productive large
area of moose habitat knmvn to us. Densities of moose exceeding 4/kn2 have
been achieved over most of the burn (vs densities of ca 0.08/km2 in simila~
unburned areas (Spencer and Chatelain 1953) through a combination of hizh
forage production, generally mild >rinters, abundant alternate foods
(especially V. vitis-idaea), edge effect, and adjoining upland ranges.
The fire burned 127,600 ha of approximately 260,000 ha, and has
regenerated into several paper birch and birch-spruce communities ('.::'ajle.
11) • The entire burn has not been analyzed, but detailed type maps h2,ve
been constructed of the reasonably-representative 1024 ha enclosed by the
Kenai Hoose Research Center·1 enclosures.
A nap of 254 ha of this mixed habitat, prepared 20 years after tl:.e
burn, (Figure_)') >vas analyzed for sizes of ind:lvidual stands and ac:wt:nt
of ecotone bet.veen each of the 11 communities distinguished (Tables 12-13).
A "stand" was defined as a contiguous area of one community, regardless
of shape, and ecotone was simpl taken as the length of mapped margin
between stands.
The 254 ha contains 624 individual stands ranging in size from .02 ~a
to 18.4 ha (Table 13). Hean stand size is 0.41 ha, and 86% of all sts.:1cs
are less than 0.5 ha in area; only 8% of the stands are larger than J_ ha,
and only 2% larger than 5 ha. Remnant mature stands comprise 118 ha.
or 46% of the area. This mature forest is extremely segmented, conpri_s=:_~:~:;
411 stands distributed throughout the area.
I A joint project of Alaska Department of Fish and Game and U. S. p::_::r-:~ c.~ .J.. ... \..I..
Wildlife Service.
r -: rT":l r . -:J r'"'l ·· [!] rJ C""-J r~J c-J , r .·:J , c:-J ·L. --:-1 r:-1 · · r-J r-j r-J r J · r-i l -:J
Table 12: Sizes of' G/.!r stnnds of 11 communit:Le!> in /.S!1 ha of the Kenai, Alaska (191.t7) burn, mapped in 1967,
Kena:i Hot':~e EesC";n·c:h Center, Pen t1,
---···-~···· ___ ......__ _______ , _____ ,.~-------·---..----~-----~ .. -~ .... -------. ...--.,---·-__ .........,. ____________ ·--
Total No. Stands of Area
--------~~--~-.. -----... -----~· Number area x area/ range
Communi t_~ Stands ha stand-ha ha/stand .5ha .5-l.Oha 1.1-2. Oha 2.1-5ha 5-10ha 10ha -
Dense Nature Hard1wods 22 43.07 1.96 ,05-12.9 9 5 2 3 2 1
Thin Nature Hard1voods 383 70.69 0.18 ,02-18.4 368 7 4 1 1 2
Nature Spruce 6 4.54 0.76 ,02-3.9 5 1
Spruce Regrm-rth 10 19.29 1.93 .H--11. 6 4 2 2 1 1
Spruce-Birch Regrmvth 33 17.83 0.54 ,02-2.3 22 5 5 1
Spruce-Ledum 6 5.39 0.90 .23-2.5 3 1 1 1
Dense Shrub Birch 23 7,30 0,32 ,21-1.3 20 1 2
Nedium Shrub Birch 40 41.16 1.04 .03-8.9 24 7 4 2 3
Thin Shrub Birch 77 31.28 0.41 .02-6,2 62 7 5 2 1
Grass 19 1.82 0.10 ,02-0.4 19
Sedge 5 12.05 2,41 ,07-10,2 3 1 0 1 ____ __, __ ,,,..,.......,__,, ______ . _____ ,.. _____ ., ____ ..,.. _______ . _________ ~. --~-... ··--····-_,., ___
Totn 1 ,, 6/lr 25Lr, Lr2 0' l!l , 0?.-:1 B. 4 539 36 25 11 8 5
Percent of totcll standr> 86~;~ 6% !I% 2% 1% 1%
r; r-7'1 r ....., .,, r-J r.---1 r--J ··· r--1 r_j r-J · r .:J · c:::::J t=-:J c-:-:J ~ rJ r:-J L'J rJ· Li
Table 13. Amount of ecotone (in meters) het1·1een 11 pl:mt: corm1tmJties in 254 ha of the Kenai, Alaska (1947) burn
mapl'ed tn 196 7, Kenai Noose Research Center, Pen L1, (figure ) •
---------Dense Thin
Nature Hature Nature Spruce
J
Conmuni tv -------~-H?_l.:.._~I·Toodf~t!.~~dlvoods Spruce RcgroHth
Spruce-
Birch
P'!:f,rowth
------~e~se Medium
Spruce Shrub Shrub
Ledum Birch Birch
Thin
Shrub
Birch Grass Sed?e Wat~~
Dense Mature Hardwoods
Th:i.n rV" ture Hard1vovcls
Hature Spruce
Spruce RegroHth
Spruce-Birch Regrowth
Spruce-Ledum
Dense Shrub Birch
Neclium Shrub Birch
Thin Shrub Birch
Grass
Sedge
23,600
Total Edge == 2:24,033 m = 112,0 km __ 2 __ _
17,581
72,789
325
305
206
2,541
2,Lf07 ll,029
356
2,795
3,455
17 '7 85
76
1,524
203
4,116
711
3,150
203
305
1,067
1,728
22,76lf
1,016
457
4,522
. 102
3,303
2,642
22,967
406
1,524
4,472
280
1,016
3,303
51
508
661
813
457
457
178
76
356
102
1, 931
508
102
9,755 38,167 37,169 3,099 3,609
152
356
508
r
[
n
L
[
(
[
[
r
"_]
[j
11
L
c
-~
L
[
[
[
[
r
,._.
[
,~-....
. l-.
The l.:1rge number of stands and their irregular shapes have produ:::ed
~ 2 tremendous amounts of ecotone (Table 1g --112 km in the 2.Skm area.
Nature communities have about 99 km of "edge", sharing 59 km of this \r.i th
the various seral shrub communities. Shrub communities the~selves are
surrounded by about 103 km of ecotone, bordering on mature forest and on
other seral communities.
This 2.5 km 2 area by no means represents an extreme case, out rather is
a fair sampling of the entire 260 km 2 area affected by the burn. Ey sxtra-
polation, then, the Kenai Burn (1947) produced over 60,000 separc-;te s;::a::ds
nore than 11,000 lan of ecotone and 128,000 ha of new shrub comr-,u:::i t:i.2s.
It is not surprising that moose densities achieved such a high level as ~
result of this fire.
Hoose Use -Seral burn habitats are extremely important \vinterir.g ran32.s
once grm.;th is sufficient to provide available brm.;se above the snm1.
So::-te burns (the Kenai burn [1947], for example) receive an inf:_ux c:
;:.oose from upland ranges in early Hinter, and support very deno,~c o:-:i~:::er-
ing concentrations. Others (in the upper Little Chena drainaf;c ~ea~
fairbanks, for example) support moose during late sw-nmer and fal:!._, ·::)Ut
may be virtually deserted when moose move down into denser forests and
riparian stands in November and December. The most diversified burns
(Kenai 1947) also support significant densities of moose during calving,
suilll-ner and rutting periods and have relatively high resident r--c;';.:lat:;_o:·,_:;
throughout the year.
&iTHROPOGENIC HABITATS AND EFFECTS OF DEVELOPNENT
The greatest part of man-caused moose habitat in Alaska l-;.;_;s hcen~
and continues to be, created through accidental fires. From F:::.o ·c;~:._:n~ .
.• ·
r
[
n
L
[
l
[
[
r
__j
c
n
u
['
I ~
u
"
u
___.)
-'
---"
_.,
_.
1900, 70~~ of the fires in Alaska Here man-caused, and these fires accounted
for 22;~ of the area burned (Viereck ms). This amounts to a mean of
approximately 88,000 ha of largely seral brush moose habitat created
annually by man in the last three decades. Other human activities, by
comparison, today have little effect on available moose habitat in A:;_asl-:a.
~vo short-lived activities of man, mining and homesteading, have boen
of some importance to moose in the last century. Both increased ~a~-
caused fires, and both created habitat by physical disruption of forests.
Placer mining from 1900 to as recently as 1965, although it destroyed
some riparian habitat, created a much greater area of dense, procL.Ictive
seral shrub communities along stream courses in many parts of the Inrcrior.
This disturbance had an especially great effect on moose distribu-:~io:-"
because it occurred in many areas where there were low densities of r::oose
before mining. The Kuskokwim Mountains and Yukon-Tanana highlancs ere t-:m
regions \•mere wining probably contributed significantly to incre&seC.
woose densities. Dredged "tailing" piles near Fairbanks still s;_.:_~-por::
stands of birch and willmv shrubs important to lvintering moose.
Settlement of the Matanuska Valley by homesteaders from the l9:l__C 's -co
1950's resulted in much· clearing and burning of then-maturing fores~s,
I·Jhich probably contributed significantly to the dense moose popuJ.at:'__c_.-.-:s
present there from the 1960's to the present time. In addition, -'-'·vai:a-.~:_:_ :;_~_ ty
of farm and garden crops surely did the moose no harm. Other SI'!.-~~cler c.rec_s
of concentrated agriculturally-oriented settlement in the Tanarce 'Va~~lev
and on the Kenai Peninsula probably contributed similarly to mom;e po:r;~-
lations. In all these cases, resulting fires probably had the greatest
effect upon moose habitat, however.
r
[
Sever3l thousand acres of maturing spruce forest have recently been
~
L ~ cleared mechanically on the Kenai National Moose Range. This progrE,m :;as
C
resulted in increased moose winter range, and may be expanded (Hakala et
al. 1971).
l Host land clearing in Alaska today is for road and building const-cuc-
tion and oil exploration. Seismological trails have been bulldozec through
[ many forests of the state and provide some shrub-forest ecotone. J3ccco:use
[ the actual area cleared is small, impact on moose populations is sligh~.
Road and building construction, similarly' create some nevJ brush COl!1IT!L:lli tie:s.
r _j
Depending upon their location, they may also remove productive moos2 L:.bic:.at.
Perhaps the greatest effect of these activities on moose is to i::-,c:c2ase c accidental mortality by attracting them to areas occupied by motor veh~cles,
fl trains, and occasionally aircraft. In some years, moose mortalities from
1......1 such collisions may exceed 750-1000 animals.
~~ Hith these exceptions, developmental activities have as yet ]:-,ad
c...JI
little effect on Alaska moose distribution and habitat. The proposed
1
_.... Prudhoe Bay -Valdez oil pipeline and a possible Prudhoe Bay -liacken::::".e
~ Piver gas pipeline would both pass through forested areas. Their effects
'~ on habitat will likely be minimal due to the small area actually C:istu.:::oed,
·-, but if they restrict free passage of moose they could significantly a.::=ect
c...JI
-c.oose novenents and distribution.
~,
OT~i::::::t ?J..BITATS
The northern boreal forests in Alaska, referred to by the ;z·2:-<ra:~ terc::
ntaiga," consist primarily of loH elevation open-grovJing spruce fc:.·es~:s,
-"
occasional stands of well developed spruce and hardwoods, and frL~.c;1.:2:;:: ,_
~,
....
--'
r ' -~
[
r'!
L.
c
c
[
t
r
_j
u
n
u
c
' L
c
[
[
n
L..il
~~
......
'
~
1
......;
tracts of treeless or sparsely treed bogs. On south facing slopes <:.:':d oell
drained sites the forest consists of \vhite spruce and hardHood star:ds of
mature aspen and paper birch; on cool north facing slopes and poorly d~ainec
lmvlands climax vegetation is generally black spruce and bogs.
'Host of forested Alaska north of the Gulf of Alaska con.sists of a
matrix of taiga communities ·within >-7hich most other habitats discussed
earlier have developed, each due to a particular set of special circ:u:!sta:1ces.
Because the taiga is so extensive, it supports substantial n~~bers of ~oose
even though densities are very low. In many areas, moose densities r::ay
not exceed one moose each 5-10 km 2 , but some animals are generally present.
I
The mosf important taiga habitats, in addition to the bog cor.ununi L.es
discussed above, are those bordering upon riparian or upland si.1.ru~; lF,~)i tats
or interspersed with seral fire-created communities. These areas l;rcvide
cover and some food for moose spending most of the year on more p:ceL::rred
habitats.
SillfHARY
The moose is an opportunistic species, Hell _adapted to expand :ca?ici.ly
into new habitat and to persist at low levels in restricted habitat (Geist ',
1971, Cole 1971, Hercer and Kitchen 1968, Pulliainen, this voluoe). Hoose
populations and distribution in Alaska have fluctuated in respor:~.e t:o haci-
tat changes in prehistoric and historic times.
Hoose have been present in Alaska since mid-to late PleistClce:·:· .. E,
times. They probably survived in relatively small, disjunct f).:oc:ps Hherever
suitable habitat could be found throughout this period, ·Hhe:1 a <:.undra-steppe
---,~--·--····~-....,.-,-. ·--~-~~.,--
r c
n
L_
c
[
c
c
n
--'
n
n
u
G
' c
t
.-4
c
l
G
'
Cl
r ;
-""
'--"' ;
C{.;
·I
·~
i
1 1 ~j
L
cor:mnnity dominated much of the Alaska refugium, With the close of the
glacial period, climatic \¥arming, and proliferation of shrub and forc.s t
communities, they spread throughout much of Alaska. In more recent times
riparian and subalpine \·7illow communities have provided a means of main-
taining minimal populations able to exploit new range produced by fire and
other disturbances. This pattern persists today.
Very recent extensions of moose distribution have occurred in ._1-_..
Li.!.t::.
geographic extremes of Alaska: in Southeastern Alaska, ,.,here zlacial
recessions have allmved moose to expand along major river valleys croo.;:;;::.:-,:<
the coastal range, and in northwestern Alaska, where moose have beccr-;a
established on the western Seward Peninsula and north of the Noatak River.
On the Arctic Slope moose seem to have been established for a longer
tine than on the 1vestern tundra areas, but are currently increasing in
nu...-nbers.
In nost of Alaska, moose nu...-nbers have risen and declined ciranaC:icc.l::_,,
in local areas over the last 150 years, largely in response to crsatic:-~
and maturation of fire-caused seral range. Historical accou::::cs t: ,·,:': soose
were absent from a particular locale mast likely reflect onl·,, a p:c .:iod of
very lm-1 moose numbers resulting from a prolonged absence of :::~_res in
that area. Extremely low densities of moose presently exist ln so:--:e areas
,,•here extensive spruce stands are dominant. Thus in most of A.:..aska the
purported variations in moose distribution have in reality i:t.:2::-, c:1l: \i'<i.~:i~,-
tions in r.elative abundance.
Hoose numbers increased steadily through the 1950's and e.srly 196C's
throughout most of the state, largely in response to rather regular
recurrence of extensive wildfires. In many areas numbers apparently ex-:.2eded
---.--....,..._,~-_..~•~"~.....,.., .... --.·-~·-. •"•---~~~--·· ·~· -----·n·.--,_~,........,..,,.:-•u,•p~•--.......-.: ........... ,...,....-,,.~ 0
r
[
n
L
[
[
[
[
f'
[
n
L
[
~_,
L
[
[
[
[
f'
l.J
[
r~~
i
~
scvc;_·c \vi.nl:er cnrrying capncity. In much of Southcentral and Interior J..::..3s:Za,
moose nuwhers have stabilized or declined in recent years, primarily in
response to a series of severe winters, complicated by deterioratinz range
conditions, changing hunting pressure, and predation.
____ ,_ __ _,..-~ • .,._.cO-r-"""•,_.;-'~-· --·~---:-.,.,-..-.. -c, _____ ,._ • ...,...,...._.~ ... "";"""__.,...<">_....,...,,._, .. .,..,..~r:""-"
r
c
n
L
c
c
[
r-L
n . --"
D
fl
u
[
L
[
[
[
[
r-,
kJj
[
r-~
L_.
ACKNOHLEDGMENTS
Robert A. Rausch contributed many ideas to this review and rea~ the
nanuscript. R. 0. Guthrie, D. C. McKingit and L. A. Viereck read the
manuscript. L. HcHanus, C. Rhody, D. Simpson and J. Trent assisted in
nanuscript preparation. We are pleased to acknowledge these contributio~s.
Data presented here were gathered under Federal Aid in Wildlife
Restoration projects H-17 (Alaska) •
I
l ~
"' L~ ·~
[
l~
[
f
r~
[
r
l--
•
[
L
r L;
[
[
[
r~
.._..
[
r~ ~
L,
LITERATURE CITED
Alask.:J Dept. of Fish and Game. 1973. Alaska's wildlife and habitat.
Anchorage, Alaska 590pp.
Alberts, R. c.· (Ed.). 1971. North American big game. The Boone and
Crockett Club, Pittsburgh, Pa. 403pp.
A .. -,.derson, J. P. 1959. Flora of Alaska and adjacent parts of Canc-:c'.a.
Im·Ja State Univ. Press, Ames. 543pp.
Pu1.dreasen, G. E., C. Wahrhaftig, and I. Zietz. 1964. Aeromagnetic
reconnaissance of the east-central Tanana lowland, Alaska.
USGS, Washington 3pp.
Barney, R. J. 1969. Interior Alaska Hi1dfires 1956-1965. Institute
Northern Forestry. Juneau, Alaska 47pp.
1971. 1\Tildfires in Alaska--some historical and projcctc:d
effects and aspects. In: Slaughter, C. ~\f. et al. Fire in the nc;:.·thern
environment. Pac. NW Forest and Range Exp. Sta., Portland Sl-.5:,'.
Bee, J. \·J. and E. R. Hall. 1956. M&<lma1s of northern Alaska.
Misc. Publ. No. 8. Univ. of Kansas Museum of Natural Histor:1 :..::,SJ~Y').
Benninghoff, H. S. 1952. Interaction of vegetation and soil frost
phenomena. Arctic 5:34-44 •
Bishop, R. H. 1969. Preliminary revieH of changes in sex and a~.;s
ratios of moose and their relation to snow conditions on tl-:.0:
Tanana Flats, Alaska. Paper presented at 6th Ann. N. Am. l~oose
Coa~itte~ Meeting, Feb. 3-5. Kamloops, B. C., 14 pp. xerox.
Black, R. F. 1958. Lovrlands and plains of interior and western Alaska
In: H. Williams (Ed.). Landscapes of Alaska. Univ. Calif. Press,
Berkeley pp. 76-81.
Bliss, L. C. and J. E. Cantlon. 1957.
northern Alaska. Am. Midl. Nat.
Succession on river alluvium in
58:452-469.
Brooks, J. H. 1953. A record of North America's most westerly :::::oc::;e.
J. 11ailll!lal. 34:396-397.
Burris, 0. E. 1965. Game transplants in Alaska. Proc. \·;est .. Assoc.
State Game and Fish Commissioners 45:93-104.
Ch.::.telain, E. F. 1951. Hinter range problems of moose in the S:..:>i c::::a.
Valley. Proc. Alaska Sci. Conf. 2:343-347.
1952. Distribution and abundance of moose in i'-.lask:''·. :::.:::-oc .
3rd Alaska Sci. Conf. pp. 134-136.
r
[
!1
L
[
c
[
E
n
[
n
L
[
--..
L
c
[
[
[
r
'---"'
. l
r -
L
Chcsemore, D. L. 1968. Occurrence of moose near BarroH, Alaska.
J. 1-bn~nal. 49(3) :528-529.
Cole, G. F. 1971. An ecological rationale for the natural or
artificial regulation of native ungulates in parks. Trans.
~. 1\m. Wildl. Nat. Res. Conf. 36:417-425.
Colinvaux, P. A.
Ecol. Honogr.
1964a. The environment of the Bering Land Bridge.
34:297-329.
1964b. Origin of Ice Ages: pollen evidence from Arctic
Alaska. Science 145(3633):707-708.
1967. Quaternary vegetational history of Arctic Alaska.
pp. 207-231, In: Hopkins, D. M. (Ed.). The Bering Land Bridge.
Stanford Univ;rsity Press 495pp.
Cooper, W. S. 1942. Vegetation of Prince 1,;Tilliam Sound Region, Alaska;
lvith a brief excursion into past-Pleistocene climatic history.
Ecol. Monogr •. 12:1-22.
Crocker, R. L. and B. A. Dickson. 1957. Soil development on the J:::::-
cessional moraines of the Herbert and Mendenhall Glaciers, sou.:::h-
eastern Alaska. J. Ecol. 45:169-185.
CroH, J. H. 1968. Plant ecology of the Copper River Delta, AlasL::..
Ph.D. Thesis, 't\Tashington State Univ., Pullman 120pp.
Drury, William H., Jr. 1956. Bog flats and physiographic process2_;
in the upper Kuskolavim River region, Alaska. Contrib. Gray Ee.::-b.
No. 178, Harvard Univ. 130pp.
Dutro, J. T. and T. G. Payne. 1957. Geological map of Alaska.
USGS, Scale 1:2, 500,000.
Flerow, C. C. 1967. On the origin of the mammalian fauna of Canada.
pp. 271-280, In: Hopkins, D. M. (Ed.). The Bering Land Bridge.
Stanford University Press 495pp.
Geist, V. 1971. Mountain Sheep. University of Chicago, 383pp.
Guthrie, R. D. 1968. Paleoecology of the large mammal community ~~
Interior Alaska during the late Pleistocene. Natn. geogr. Hag.,
79(2):346-363. April 1968.
Eadl.eigh-Hest, F. 1966. Archaeology of Ogotoruk Creek. In:
Hilii!10vsky, N. J, and J. N. Half e (Eds.) • Environment of L:e ca~,e
Thompson region, Alaska. U.S. Atomic Energy Comm., 1,250 ~~~,
Hakala, J. B., R. K. Seemel, R. A. Richey and J. E. Kurtz. 1971.
Fire effects a11d rel1abilitatior1 rnetl-1ods--&i'anson-Russic..:.~l l~i,_,-~.:.~:-s ::i~es.
In: Slaughter, C. H. et al. Fire in the northern envirom;:.e,Jt.
Pac. ffi\1' Forest and Range Exp. Sta. Portland pp. 87-99.
r
[
' I'
L
[
c
[
E
n
[
. r:
LJ
"
[
L
[
[
[
[
r~
E
L.J
Hall, E. R. and K. R. Kelson. 1959. The marrunals of North America.
2 Vols., 1,083pp.
Hanson, H. C. 1951. Characteristics of some grassland, marsh, and
other plant con~unities in western Alaska. Ecol. Monogr.
21(4):317-378.
1953. Vegetation types in northwestern Alaska and
co~parisons with communities in other arctic regions. Ecolozy
34(1):111-140.
1958. Analysis of Nelchina caribou range. U.S. Fish
and ~~ildl. Serv., Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Job Completion Rept.
Job 6, W-3-R-12. Juneau, Alaska 68pp.
Rardy, C. E. and J. W. Franks. 1963. Forest fires in Alaska.
U.S. Forest Service Research Paper INT-5, 163pp.
Hatter, J. 1948. The status of moose in North America. Trans.
N. A11. Wildl. Conf. 14:492-501.
Hopkins, D. M. 196 7. The Ceuozoic history of Beringia -a synt[:csis.
pp. 451-484, In: Hopkins, D. :a. (Ed.). The Bering Land Bri<iz,e.
Stanford University Press 495pp •
Hovmrd, H. A. 1868. G. Captain Ho-vrard 1 s final report. Report of the
Han. Hugh :HcCulloch, Secretary of the Treasury, on Alaska, accowpany-
ing the President's Message Replying to the Resolution of the House
of Representatives of the 19th of December, 1867. In: Russian
America. Executive Documents printed by order of the House o:
Representatives during the Second Session of the Rortieth Co~gress,
1867-68. Executive Document No. 177 (Part 1) 36lpp.
Hulten, Eric. 1968. Flora of Alaska and neighboring territories.
Stanford University Press, 1,008 pp.
Imaniski, K. 1950. Ecological observations on the Great Khingan
Expedition. Geog. Rev. 40:236-253.
Johnson, P. L. and T.
region, Alaska.
C. Vogel. 1966. Vegetation of the Yukon ::?lc:.ts
CRREL Research Report 209. Hanover, N. H. 53p).
Joh;:;_.son, P. R. and C. H. Hartman. 1969. Environmental atlas o:E .".~-as~:a.
Inst. of Arctic Env. Eng. and Inst. of Hater Res. Univ. Alaska,
College lllpp.
~lein, D. R. 1965. Post-glacial distribution patterns of mamma~s
southern coastal regions of Alaska. Arctic 18(1) :9pp.
in t::.._
La ?crouse, J. F. G. 1797. Voyage de La Perouse au tour du mondc. :'ui;J..i~
conforr.1ement au d&cret du 22 Avril 1791, et r&dige par N:.L.A. ·.ri>··,:-
Mureau. Tome second. L'imprimerie de la republique, Paris 298~'>.
'
Larsen, J. A. 1965, The vegetation of the Ennadai Lake area, N.W.T.:
Studies in subarctic and arctic bioclimatology. Ecol. Monogr.
35(1):37-59.
Leopold, A. S. and F. F. Darling. 1953a. Wildlife in Alaska. Ronal(;
Press Co. 129pp.
Leopold, A. S. and F. F. Darling, 1953b. Effects of land use on ~oose
and caribou in Alaska. Trans. 18th N. Am. Hildl. Conf. pp. 553-562.
LeResche, R. E. 1966. Behavior and calf survival in Alaskan moose.
Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Univ. Alaska 85pp.
1973a. 1ligrations and population mixing of moose on ~he
Kenai Peninsula (Alaska). 8th N. Am. Moose Conf. Ontario
(in press).
1973b. Migrations of moose in North America. This volume.
LeResche, R. E. and J. L. Davis. 1971. Moose research report. Pro:;.
H-17-3, Jobs l.lR, 1.2R, 1.3R, 1.4R.
LeResche, R. E. and J. L. Davis. 1973. Importance of nonbrowse food~: ::o
moose. J. Wildl. Hgmt. (in press).
Lutz, H. J. 1956. Ecological effects of forest fires in the interior of
Alaska. USDA Tech. Bull. 1133 12lpp.
1960. Early occurrence of moose on the Kenai Peninsul;c ;:::'-'
in other sections of Alaska. Hisc. Publ. No. 1, Alaska Forest ;:~eoo2-::J.Ych
Center, U.S. Forest Service, Juneau.
NcCulloch, D. S. 1967. Quaternary geology of the Alaskan shore of tl~e:
Chukchi Sea. pp. 91-120, In: Hopkins, D. H. (Ed.). The Beri:-:g :Lz,:::-~d.
Bridge. Stanford University Press 495pp.
Mercer, W .. E. and D. A. Kitchen. 1968. A preliminary report on ::_-:.2
extension of moose range in the Labrador Peninsula. Proc. 5t::
N. Am. Moose Horkshop. Kenai, Alaska pp. 62-81.
Milke, G. C. 1969. Some moose-willow relationships in the interior of
Alaska. Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Univ. Alaska 79pp.
J:v'd.ller, F. L., E. Broughton and E. M. Land. 1972. Moose fatalit:,-:·e-
sulting from overextension of range. J. Wildl. Dis. 8(95-98)"
:-:urie, 0. J. 1959. Fauna of the Aleutian Islands and Alaska Pen:_:.,,:ul.:
N. A.m. Fauna No. 61. U.S. Fish and ~.Jildl. Serv., \-Jash., D.C. 4CC·-.· · ..
I
" l_~
'
L
[
-"'
[
c
r __J
c
n
u
•
c
1
L.
c
[
[
r•
I
lu
r-·
c...il
~
I ~
'--'
-'
Nclso:1, E. H. 1887. Report upon natural history collections made in
Al<1ska bctHeen the years 1877 and 1881. U.S. Army Signal Service
Arctic Series No. III, Part II. In: Nelson, E. W. and F. W. True.
:1-fanunals of North Alaska pp. 227-293.
Nordhagen, R. 1943. Sckilsdalen og Norges Fjellbeitor. En Plantesos~ologisk
Honographi. Griegs Boktr. Bergen. (cited in Hanson 1951) 607:pp.
Osburn, H. F. 1921. The age of mammals. MacMillan Co., New York 635pp.
Osgood, 1v. H. 1909. Biological investigations in Alaska and Yukon
Territory. N. Am. Fauna No. 30., U.S. Dept. Agr., Bureau of
Biol. Surv. , Hash. 96pp.
Pegau, R. E. 1972. Caribou report. Fed. Aid Proj. Seg. Rept. Jo;:,s
1-1-17-2 and W-17-3. Juneau, Alaska 216pp.
Pewe, T. L. 1965. Fairbanks area, in Guidebook F, Central and Scc:::.:-,e~~n
. Alaska. Int. Assoc. QuaternaryRes. (INQUA), 7:th Congr. (Boulder),
1965 pp. 6-36.
PeHe, T. L. and D. M. Hopkins. 1967. Hammal remains of pre-Hisco:::s_:_n
age in Alaska. In: Hopkins, D. M. (Ed.). The Bering Land Brid~e.
Stanford University Press pp. 266-270.
Porter, S. c. 1964.
Range, Alaska.
Pleistocene geology of Anaktuvuk Pass, central Brooks
Tech. Paper 18, Arctic Inst. N. Am.
Pulliainen, E. 1973. Seasonal movements of moose in Europe. Thi~; vo:~c:~~-2.
Rausd1, R. A. and A. E. Bratlie. 1965. Annual assessments of moose cc~li
production and mortality in south-central Alaska. Proc. Hes::. Assoc.
State Game and Fish Co~~issioners 45:140-146.
Ra:;.rr:wnd, C. W. 1871. Report of a reconnaissance of the Yukon Ri"·e::-, .~~::.aska
Territory. July to September, 1869. 42nd Congress, 1st Sessio:-~.
Senate Executive Document No. 12 ll3pp.
1873. The Yukon River region, Alaska. J. Am. Geogr. SoJC.
r~ew York 3:158-192.
Repenning, C. A. 1967. Palearctic-Nearctic mammalian dispersal =-~-, :he
late Cenozoic. In: Hopkins, D. M. (Ed.). The Bering Land Bri~ge.
Stanford University Press 495pp.
Repenning, C. A., D. M. Hopkins and M. Rubin. 1964. Tundra roderi:::s ir _
late Pleistocene fauna from the Tofty placer mining district, c2n~~.:::.
Alaska. Arctic 17:177-197.
Ritchie, J. C. 1959. The vegetation of northern 11anitoba. ADIA ';:cc'l>..
Paper 3 56pp.
~-~---
(
r
[
I .r
L
c
c
[
r
[
r ___.
c
I!
u ,.
c
"' L
[
[
r-~
L;
:
_,,ii
-"
c
.J
J
Seemcl, R. K. 1969. Range-productivity relationships. In: Bishop, R. H •
Hoose report. Fed. Aid in \Vildl. Rest. Proj. Seg. Rept. W-15-R-3.
Juneau, Alaska pp. 144-149.
Sheldon, C. 1930. (neH edition 1960). The wilderness of Denali.
Scribners, N.Y. 412pp;
Skoog, R. 0.
Alaska.
1968. Ecology of the caribou (Rangifer tarandus gra~ci) in
Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. Cal., Berkeley 699??·
Slaughter, C. W., R. J. Barney and G. M. Hansen. 1971. Fire i~ t~c
northern environment. Pac. N1<J Forest and Range Exp. Sta. Portlar:d
275pp.
Spencer, D. H. and E. F. Chatelain. 1953. Progress iri the manageT;0.2:1t of
the moose in southcentral Alaska. Trans. 18th N. Am. Wildl. Conf.
pp. 539-552.
Spencer, D. H. and J. Hakala. 1964. Moose and fire on the Kenai. ?ro::::.
3rd Annu. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conf. Tallahassee, Fla. pp. 10-33.
Spetzman, L. A. 1959. Vegetation of the Arctic Slope of Alaska. U.S.
Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper 302:19-58.
Stone, A. J. 1903. The moose, 'tvhere it lives and hm.; it lives. In:
Roosevelt, F., T. S. van Dyke, D. G. Elliot and A. J. Stone. The
Deer Family. McHillan, N.Y. pp. 291-325.
Turner, L. M. 1886. Contributions to the natural history of Alas~£.
Gov. Printing Office, Hash., D. C. 226pp.
Viereck, L. A. 1970a. Forest succession and soil development adjacent to
the Chena River in interior Alaska. Arctic and Alpine Resch. 2(:_) :1-26,
1970b. Soil temperatures in river bottom stands in
interior Alaska. In: Ecology of the subarctic regions, Proc.
Helsinki Symp. (Ecol. and Conser. No. 1). Paris, mmsco 364:::;::-,.
(in press). lvildfire in the taiga of Alaska. J. Quat. R2s.
75pp.
Viereck, L. A. and E. L. Little, Jr. 1972. Alaska trees and shrubs.
U.S. Dept. Agr. Handbook 410 265pp.
Wahrhaftig, C. 1965.
?rof. ?aper 482.
Physiographic divisions of Alaska. Geol. Su:'-'.
U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Wash. 52pp.
\·Jickersha':l, J. 1938. Old Yukon tales, trails, trials. toJash. Law -''·'O;",
Co. 514pp.
cL
·[
~[~
~-'
C
:;c
[
)
c
,0
./
c
j~
·u
"' c
c
c
c
c
r
w
-..
_j
,.,
.J
..:!
lvrangell, F. P. 1839. Statistische und ethnographische Nachrichten uber
die Russischen Besitzungen an der Nord\·lestkuste von Amerika. Gesammelt
von dem ehemaligen Obervenvalter dieser Besitzungen, contre-admira1 v.
\{rangell. Auf Kosten der Kaiserl. Akademie der Wissenschaften
he.rausgegeben und mit den Berechnungen aus Wrangell's Wi tterungsb ::obach-
tungen und andern Zusatzen vermehrt von K. E. v. Baer. Beitrage zur
Kenntniss des Russischen Reiches und der angranzenden Lander Asiens.
:Sd. l. v-xxxvii + 332pp.
Zagoskin, L. A. 1967. Lieutenant Zagosrin's travels in Russian America,
1842-1844. Arctic Inst. of N. Am., Anthropology of the North.
Translations from Russian sources/No. 7 H. N. Michael (Ed.) 358pp.
UNPUBLISHED REFERENCES
Burns, J. J. Research biologist, Alaska Department of Fish and G2.r.-cc,
Fairbanks.
Rausch, R. A. Deputy Director, Game. Alaska Department of Fish 2..--..~
Ga:::c. Juneau.
3.:;;.c:':.ett, .J. Longtime resident; Hus:.ia; Alaska.
Sc ... c::vi:J.2, R. J. Regional Game Su~Jervisor. lJ.aska Department r.
ar~~ C2.i--ne.
S::c;:.::er:sc::-,, R. 0. Biologist. Alaska D:::partment of Fish and Gar:.::::,
Fa~rbanks.
',';::,":::·-~-:., J. Longtime resident; k"laktuvuk Pass, Alaska.
Vie:c.ck; L. A. Principal plant ecologist. Institute of Norther.:!.
Fo~astry; College, Alaska.
'-:,.
-'-'•·'
,\:::::,cL R. Area biologist. Alaska Depart:-:<ent of Fish and Game, K;:.:-::li~.:::·~,
. ...
Lcf\.csclw, :·;io"-hop zud Coady: Dist.:c ibution and Habitats c.;_-= ~-~oose
in 1\laska.
List of Figures
Fig. l. Present distribution of moose in Alaska. Numbers
indicate: 1. Unuk River; 2. Stikine River; 3. Taku River;
4. Chilkat River; 5. Alsek River; 6. Cape Fairweather;
7. Yakutat Bay; 8. Copper River; 9. Prince William Sour:6;
10. Anchorage; 11. Matanuska River; 12. Susitna River; l3.
Bristol Bay; 14. Kuskokwim River; 15. Yukon-Kuskokwim DE: __ ·:::..;
16. Yukon River; 17. Norton Sound; 18. Koyukuk River; 19, ;_-.:.. ir-
banks; 20. Tanana River; 21. Porcupine River; 22. Kong~ku~
River; 23. Anaktuvuk River; 24. Colville River; 25. P~c. 3c -~.')W;
26. Pt. Hope; 27. Noatak River; 28. Kobuk River; and 29. c:.:.:.:_-:Je
Prince of Wales.
Fig. 2. Vegetation type-map of the Tanana Flats, a typ::.,-::a1
Interior Alaska lowland moose habitat. Note extreme j~[-::2:·
position of communities.
Fig. 3. Distribution of riparian willow communi ties a.Lcl'""J -.-..:-:e
eastern Arctic North Slope of Alaska. The Kongakut Rive~ stand
described in Table 10 is illustrated.
Fig. 4. Usual successional sequences following fires .c.,. r-: aska.
(From Viereck ms).
Fig. 5. Vegetation type-map of 2. 5 km 2 area of the 19L: 7 I·C,~::-lai,
Alaska burn, mapped in 1967. This area contains 624 senar~te
stands and 112 km of ecotone.
Plates -These figures were not referenced in the -e:ex _: bu-t
mav be used with these captions.
Fig. 6. Moose do retard succession in some small winter-y~~d
areas. J. Coady photo, Kenai Peninsula.
Fi<;s. 7, 8, and 9. Moose have retarded succession in t:Le 1320hz
:Ker"ai Lake burn, now 14 years old. R. Bishop photo.
:?ig. 10. Upland climax communities of shrubby birch anc~ v.'illmv
are extensive and important habit:ats in many areas. R. 3L::>:c-::c
photo, central Alaska Range.
Fig. 11. Upland ranges at timberline are. important sc.:'":i:-:,er -fall
habitats on the Kenai Peninsula. R. Bishop photo.
Fig. 12 & 13. Dense shrubs re-invading burns in Interior Alaska
create excellent fall -winter ranges for moose. ,; • Co;; .. dy photo.
Fig. 14. The 128,000 ha (1947) burn on the Kenai Peninsula
created tremendous amounts of forage and a great diversity of
habitats. R. LeResche photo.
Fig. 15. Edge effect is important on seral winter ranges. ADF&G
photo.
Fig. 16. The Tanana Flats, a typical Interior lowland, su:::;:,~,or'cs
diverse communities important to moose as calving and wint~~ing
habitats. J. Coady photo.
Fig. 17. Spruce -bog habitats typify areas where moose co::.ce:1trate
during calving. R. Bishop photo.
Fig. 18. Lowland communities on the Tanana Flats are v.:::·::y lush
surr@er habitats. J. Coady photo.
Fig. 19. Interior .lowlands show great juxtaposition c:.:: ::L:~~r iz -
a~d marshy communities, R. Bishop photo.
Fig. 20. Extensive lowlands and prime upland habitats 2-~::2 c ---··
in close proximity in Alaska. R. LeResche photo, Kenai ?e~:.
Fig. 21. Agricultural practices have created some ~ew moosa
habitat, and some conflicts. J. Trent, ADF&G photo.
Fig. 22. Riparian willow communities provide a great biorr.ass of
forage year-round. J. Trent, ADF&G photo.