HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA1675r
r
1
r
r
1
r
r
1
r
1
TANANA BASIN AREA PLAN
HC
107
.A42
T32
1984
SUMMARY
OF THE
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
STATE OF ALASKA
Department of Natural Resources
4420 Airport Way
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Soil Conservation Service
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
----------------------------------~--------
SUMMAR"I'
OF THE
.~~""'" ~.., m ------------
HC--
lO'~
.,,41)~
T.:g:;L.
1111
8oy
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Alaska
lJbl'llry lk l!.!lbrm~twnll~ftle<Js 1\n~hor~e,JU~~k~
-
"""'
'-'
'"~<!$>'
._
....
""'
,_
-
\-
,,_
"""'''""'li!!!'~~
~~m~[ @~ m~m~~&
DEPARTMENT OF NATUBAL BESOUBCES
DIVISION OF LAND AND WATER MANAGEMENT
May 4, 1984
Oear Reviewer:
BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR
555 Cordova Street
Pouch 7-005
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
Phone: (907) 276-2653
I an pl eased to submit for your comnents this draft of the Tanana
Basin Area Plan. This is a summary of a proposed land use plan for 12.5
million acres of state land in the Tanana River watershed. (This plan
does not address pri vate, federal or local govE~rnnent land).
In Hay and June, 1984, hearings will be held in communities
throughout the Basin to receive public comment on this draft. After the
hearings, the plan will be revised to incorporate public comments before
it is adopted by the Oepartment of Natural Resources. ~Jhen it is
adopted, the plan becomes official policy di recting the day-to-day
management of state lands in the Basin.
In addition to the hearings, written or orc:tl comments may be directed
to Susan Todd, Project Manager, Oepartment of Natural Resources, 4420
Airport Way, Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 (telephone! 479-2243). Comments must
be received no later than June 29, 1984.
Although the plan appears lengthy, its pUirpose and organization are
not complex. In brief, the plan states \~hat land uses are ta be
permitted on state lands and establishes guidelines on hovJ these uses are
to occur. The land uses that will be emphasized in specifie areas are
discussed in Chapter 3. If your time is limited, you may wish ta
concentrate on this chapter. If you would like more detail on a specifie
a rea or if you vmu 1 d 1 i ke to see a cap y of the fu 11 docunent, contact tt1e
Fairbanks office of DNR. Also, do not be distressed if you find
conclusions with which you disagree. Sortinq these things out is the
purpose of this draft.
We look forward ta your comments •
. i ncere ly,
_... .. l~
~ Tom Hawkins
Director
Di vi si on of Land and Water r•1anagement
,~~~--~------~--~~=--=----------~--~-----------=--------------------~~--~~--~ ... ·~~-~~~ru.------------------
-
,_
"""'
-
""""
'-
-
-
-
,_
-
-
,_
,._
"-
-
-
ACKNOWLEDGEHENTS
The Tanana Basin Planning Team would like to extend our special
thanks to Melba Oester, Susan Hollett, Elaine Thomas, and Romeo Rescober
for their patience and dedication in the preparation of the manuscript
and graphie work for this document. Special acknowledgement is due to
the Sail Conservation Service of the United States Department of
Agriculture for its assistance in data inventory and analysis through the
USOA River Basin Studies Program.
i
~~~~--------------------~----~----~~------------------~,~~. -------~!!!---""'"'"""' -·J··-
"-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
DRAFT TANANA BASIN AREA PLAN
CONTENTS
Acknowledgmen-ts ............................................. i
Planning Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Chapterl
Chapter2
In-troducdon and Land Designa-tion s,ummaries ....... 1-1
Areawide Land Managemen-t Polides ................ 2-1
Agriculture ............................................... 2-3
Fish and Wildlife Habitat .................................... 2-10
Forestry .................................................. 2-13
Recreation ................................................ 2-16
Settlement ................................................ 2-19
Subsurface Resources and Materials .......................... 2-28
'Iransportation ............................................ 2-35
Miscellaneous Guidelines ................................... 2-38
Instream Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 8
Lakeshore Management .................................... 2-40
Public Ac cess •.......................................... 2-4 2
Remote Cabin Permits ..................................... 2-45
Stream Corridors ......................................... 2-4 7
Trail Management ........................................ 2-52
Wetlands Management .................................... 2-56
Resource Management ..................................... 2-59
Chapter 3 Land Managemen-t Policies for Each ltlanagemen"t Uni-t. 3-1
Borough .................................................. 3-3
Lower Tanana ............................................. 3-13
Kantishna ................................................ 3-22
Parks Highway ............................................ 3-31
West Alaska Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-40
East Alaska Range .......................................... 3-43
Upper Tanana ............................................. 3-46
Upper Goodpaster ......................................... 3-53
Chapter 4 Implemen-ta-tion .................. ,, ................ 4-1
Proposais for Legislative and Administrative Designations ........ 4-2
Land Trades Proposed Selections and Rdinquislunents .......... 4-6
Management Plans ........................ ,, ................ 4-6
Instream Flow Reservations ................................. 4-6
Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... 4-6
Land Sales Program in the Tanana Basin ....................... 4-10
Appendices
1. Procedures for Plan Modification and Amendment ......... AI-l
ii
~~
....
-
-
,....
-
-
-
"""'
._.,
-
·-
-
~ lf!'--'"'
PLANNING TEAM
Bill Beaty (Section Chief)
Susan Todd (Project Manager)
De 1 ores 0 '~~ara
Rob Walkinsha~l
Jim Allaway, Randy Cowart,
Frank Rue (Statewide Policies)
Bill Cape 1 and
Nat Goodhue
Carlos Lozano
Jeff Burton
Steve Clautice
t1att Robus
Richard Spitler, Chris Ballard
Joyce Beelman
Jerry Rafson
DEPARTNENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Division of Land & Water Mngt.
Resource Allocation Section
(Lead Agency)
Di vi s1i on of Land & Uater t1ngt.
Division of Parks and Outdoor
Recreation
Division of Agriculture
Division of Mining
Division of Forestry
DEPARTt-1ENT OF FISH AND GME
FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION
DEPARI•1ENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND
PUBLIC FACILITIES
COOPERATIVE AGENCIES
U.S.D.A. SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
iii
s;,,.remmns uO!llm8!s;,a Pire!
pue UO!:PUpO.QUI
r;----------------------~---------------------=---"'
,_
,_
ç~
-
,_
'-'
'-'
I. INTRODUCTION
This document is a draft land use plan for state lands in the Tanana
Basin. This draft is intended for public review. In t1ay and June, 1984,
hearings \<"lill be held in communities throughout the Basin to receive
public comment on this draft. After the hearings, the plan will be
revised to incorporate the comments before it is formally adopted by the
Department of Natural Resources.
This plan will designate the uses that are to occur on much of the
state land within the Tanana Basin. It will show areas to be sold for
pri vate use and a reas ta be retai ned in state mmershi p. It does not
control uses on private, Borough or Federal land, nor does it direct land
use on areas that have already been legislatively designated for specifie
purposes, such as parks or wildlife refuges, and lands which are dealt
with in existing management plans, such as Nenana-Totchaket and Delta-
Salcha.
Since mre than one use is permitted on most state lands, the plan
also establishes rules \'lhich allmoJ various uses to occur without serious
conflicts. For example, in an area intended for residential use, the
plan explains how public access to streams and trails is to be
maintained.
To present this information, the draft plan is organized into four
chapters. Chapter I provides a brief description of the planning area,
the reas ons v1hy a pl an i s necessary for the Tana na Basin, and the types
of decisions made by the plan. It also provides an introduction to the
planning process and the agencies involved in developing the plan. It
also includes a summary of the land designations for each type of
re source use.
An overview of the goals, management guidelines, land allocations,
and implementation procedures that affect each major resource or type of
land use is presented in Chapter II. This chapter explains the basic
polices for agriculture, settlement, forestry, recreation, fish and
wildlife habitat, subsurface resources, transportation, access, lakeshore
management, i nstream flow, stream cor ri dors, trai 1 management, remote
cabin perr.~its and and resource management designations.
Chapter III is a detailed description of the land use designations
in each of the plan's eight subregions. The subregions are major geo-·
graphie subdivisons of the Basin. Each subregion is further divided into
management units, of which there are 79. A management unit is an area
that is generally homogeneous \'lith respect ta its resources, topography,
and 1 and ownershi p. For each management unit the re i s a statement of
h!anagement intent and management guidelines; a chart listing primary and
secondary land uses, prohibited land uses, and recomhlended land
classifications. Designated land uses are also shown on maps contained
at the end of this document.
The final chapter (Chapter IV) explains how the plan 1t1ill be ir.~ple-
1·1
A. The Study Area
The Tanana Rasin covers approxir:1ately 21 million acres in interior
Alaska (see r:1ap, page 1-3). All of the lands in the Fairbanks North Star
Barou gh a re i ne 1 u ded wi thin the study a rea.
The Tanana River Basin is one of interior Alaska's largest drain-
ages, encompass i ng over 21 million acres, as shown on the 1 ocat ion mnp.
The basin is bounded by the Yukon-Tanana Uplands on the north, the
Cana di an border on the east, the A 1 as ka Range on the south and the
Kuskokwim Mountains on the west.
In arder ta organize the planning process for such a large, diverse
regi on, the study a rea \'las subdi vi ded i nto major subregi ons. The bounda-
ries of these subregions--East Alaska Range, West Alaska Range, Parks
Highway, Kantishna, Lower Tanana, Upper Tanana, Goodpaster, and Fairbanks
North Star Borough --are shawn on page 1-4.
The State of Alaska mms or has selected approxir~ately 71% of the
land in the study area (17 million acres). Another 15% (3.6 million
acres) is in federal ownership. Of the remaining land, approxir~ately
110,000 acres are ovmed by the Fairbanks North Star Borough, 14% (3.5
million acres) are owned or selected by Native village and regional
corporations, and 247,000 acres are in other private ownerships.
The 1982 population of the study area was approximately 60,000.
Most of these people live in the Fairbanks North Star Borough or one of
the smaller cornmunities in the Basin.
B. Why Plan for the Use of Public Land?
Through the management of state lands, the state greatly influences
the physical development patterns and the general quality of life in the
Tanana Basin. t1ajor development projects such as mining, timber har-
vests, or agriculture influence local job opportunities. Land sold for
residential or private recreational use clearly affects the character of
comr~unity life, as does land retained for hunting, fishing, and other
public uses. Because the use of state land has such great effects on the
physical landscape and quality of life, it is essential that there be an
open public process of deciding how to manage that land.
1·2
•
~
N
-
-
-
-
-
~
Wll
mil
f f
-w
~~
Location of the Tanana Basin
r
\TANANA BASIN
· AREAPIAN \
·•
\
\
1. Fairbanks North Stu Borough
2. lowa Tanana
3. Kand$hna
4. Parks
S. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
1. Upper Tanana
8. Goodputa
9. Delta-Salcha Atta Plan
~
[ ( 1,
-,l..
Q·-
Lower Tanana
Kantishna
3
~ <~~/ ~
'-
··~. ~
(. 1
\
1
\
2
~
1.
1
5
Delta-Salcha
Area Plan
TANANA BASIN
ARFA PIAN
Subreg!on Boundaries
[."·• l
Upper Tanana
1 1 l
-
,_
-
"-
"""
!...,
'-'
1-
-
"""
--
....
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: (chapterl) 06
The Tanana Basin planning process is a means of openly reviewing
resource information and public concerns prior to making long-range
decisions about public land management. It is also a way of resolving
conflicting land use objectives and making clear to the public what
choices have been made and the reasons for those choices.
Land managers a 1 so face many day-to-day decisions about land use,
such as whether to issue permits for roads, timber harvests, or sand and
gravel extraction. These people need clear and consistent guidelines for
their decisions. Therefore, it is essential for land managers to have a
written document whi ch est ab 1 i shes long-range commitments for the use of
public land and provides clear policies for public land management.
A land use plan is also valuable for private landowners. If the
state is publicly colllllitted to land use patterns and policies, private
investors can feel ~ore secure in making decisions about their own land.
For example, if someone is contemplating developing a subdivision next to
state or borough land, it is important to know whether the public land is
likely to become a gravel pit or a recreation area.
C. What Decisions are made by the Tanana Basin Area Plan?
The Ta nana Are a Pl an determines the major 1 and uses on state 1 ands
within the study area. These uses are described in a management intent
statement for each management unit. As a guide to the statutory requlre-
ment for land classification and also to provide a brief shorthand for
intended land uses, specifie land use designations also are listed in the
management intent statements. In addition, the plan sets the management
guidelines by which potentially conflicting uses are made compatible
within a given area.
1. Land Use Designations
For each management unit and sma 11er su bu nits the p 1 an des ignat es
the primary and secondary uses that are permitted within the unit. A
primary use is one that is of major importance; the unit will be managed
to encourage its use, conservation, and/or development. A secondary use
is permitted when its occurrence will not adversely affect achteving the
objectives for the primary uses.
The plan also identifies prohibited uses within each management
unit. These are uses th at wi 11 not be perm1tted in the management unit
without specifie reconsideration of the land use designations for the
unit by the commissioner. In an area identified as critical habitat, for
example, year-round roads may be prohibited. Uses that are not specifi-
cally prohibited may be permitted on a case-by-case basis if the Alaska
Department of Natural Resources determines the proposed uses are consis-
tent with the statement of management intent for the unit in question.
1-5
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: {chapterl) 07
2. Resource Management Areas
In sorne remote areas, lands are designàted for resource management
rather than a more specifie designation such as settlement or forestry.
The resource management designation means that the land will be retained
in public ownership until the plan is revised (approximately every five
years), or until new roads, new information, or development proposals
make it necessary to review the resource management designation and
as si gn a permanent classification su ch as ag ri culture or wildl ife habi-
tat. Unti 1 such ti me as the designation is reviewed the land wi 11 be
managed for existing public uses. Changes in resource managment designa-
tions must be reviewed by an interagency planning team and the public.
There are two types of resource management areas. First, sorne lands
have resources that could support a number of different and conflicting
land uses. For example, areas with valuable agricultural soils often
support good habitat or stands of timber suitable for long term forest
management. Existing information on the costs and benefits of alterna-
tive types of management is often inadequate to determine the best long
range use of these lands. Where the distance from road access makes it
unlikely that the lands will be developed in the near term, it is prefer-
able to defer final land use decisions until better information is avail-
able. These areas are given a "high value resource management .. designa-
tion and the values associated with the particular area are described.
The second category of resource management areas consists of remote
lands where there are no· highly valuable resources identified. These are
primari ly high mountain areas, glaciers, and occasionally large bogs.
They are given a "low value resource management" designation.
3. Management Guidelines
Most public lands are intended to be managed for multiple use. For
this reason, the plan establishes management guidelines that will allow
various uses to occur without serious conflicts. Management guidelines
can direct the timing, amount, or specifie location of different activi-
ties in arder to make the permitted uses compatible. For example, timber
harvests in river corridors that are important for fishing will be
designed to protect the habitat values.
o. How was the Plan Developed?
1. The Statewide Plan
The Oepartment of Natural Resources operates under a statewide land
use plan that is updated annually. The purpose of the statewide plan is
to give guidance to planning on a regional and local scale and to serve
as an aid to decisions that require more than a local perspective. The
statewide plan identifies general land use designations and management
guidelines for all state land in Alaska. In regions such as the Tanana
Basin, where more detailed resource information has been collected and an
area plan prepared, the land use designations and management guidelines
1·6
-
-
~
-
~
!!di
-
-
----------------------------------~~------
-
-
._
-
-
-
-
"-
-
""""'
~
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: (chapterl) 08
developed in the area plan will be used to refine the statewide plan. In
the Tanana Basin, therefore, the land use designations in the statewide
plan and area plan will be identical once the Tanana Basin Area Plan has
been officially adopted.
2. The Tanana Basin Planning Process
The Ta nana Basin Dra ft Pl an i s the product of two years of work by
an interagency planning team and more than forty public meetings held
throughout the study area. The following paragraphs describe the process
in more detail.
In 1982, an interagency planning team was formed to develop a plan
for state 1 ands in the Ta nana Basin. Team members i ne 1 uded representa-
tives from the various divisions within the Department of Natural
Resources, and from the Department of Fi sh and Game, the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, the Fairbanks North Star Borough
and the Oepartment of Environmental Conservation.
The staff held public workshops in March, 1982 to identify land use
issues and planning needs in the study area. Following the meetings,
data were analyzed for agriculture, forestry, minerals, fish and wild-
11fe, settlement, recreation and water. The team prepared maps and
reports describing resource values and identifying existing and potential
land uses throughout the study area. Goals relating to the statewide
goals but specifie to the Tanana Basin were established for each
resource. The in.formation collected was used to prepare Element Papers
for each resource which served as background information for the remain-
der of the planning process. (See the Resource Element Papers, available
at the Department of Na tura 1 Resources, Di vi si on of Land and Water
Management in Fairbanks).
This information and the issues identified in the public workshops
were used to develop four alternative land use scenarios. The land use
alternatives represented different ways to resolve land use issues in the
Tanana Basin. Each emphasized a different general theme in resolving
land use issues. The purpose of the alternatives was to assist decision
makers and the public in evaluating the impacts of resource choices. The
alternative themes were as follows:
Alternative 1 --
Alternative 2 --
Alternative 3
Alternative 4 -·-
Emphasis on
Emphasis on
Emphasi s on
Emphasis on
land sales for settlement
land sales for agriculture
fish and wildlife and recreation
minerals and forestry
1-7
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: (chapterl) 09
The alternatives were reviewed by approximately 170 people at 18
public workshops in communities throughout the study area in May and
June, 1983. The Resource Allocation staff then prepared an analysis of
the alternatives which evaluated the impacts of the plan alternatives on
each of the six natural resources and on the biologicals social, fiscal
and cultural resources of the Basin. (See the Evaluation of the
Alternatives, Tanana Basin Area Plan, Department of Natura1 Resources,
1983). The RAS developed draft plan used the evaluation of the alterna-
tives and the public comments to develop a preferred alternative which is
the draft plan presented in this document.
This draft plan is not the same as any one of the four alternatives,
but represents a combination of parts of all of the alternatives plus the
incorporation of public comment. Following review of this draft, the
plan will be revised based on the public's comments and submitted to the
Commissioner of the Oepartment of Natural Resources for adoption, prob-
ably in October, 1984.
3. Public Participation
The public participation program is an essential part of the plan-
ning process. In the spring of 1982 and again in the spring of 1983,
loii!t
-
..
public workshops were held throughout the study area and in every commu-•
nity in the Basin. Three hundred four persans attended the 1982 meetings
to identify land use concerns for the Tanana Basin. Approximately 170
people attended the 1983 workshops dealing with alternative land use
plans, and written comments were received from an additional 50 people.
Results of these workshops are summarized in a separate document avail-
able from the Department of Natural Resources. Throughout the planning
process, members of the planning team and staff met with representatives .~
of many special interest groups to inform them of the plan's progress and
provide them an opportunity to review resource data and plan proposals.
Information gathered at these meetings and in written comments was
instrumental in identifying important issues, gathering data on local
resource values, developing and evaluating land use alternatives, and
ultimately in shaping the draft plan. •
-
-
-
1-8
-------------------------------~------------------------· '"""' ctb!IO!JJL...,oe!'>-~~-,------"
-
'-
-
'-
~
~~
-
-
_,
~.-~
._
E. Implementation of the Tanana Basin Area Plan
After the pl an i s si gned by the Commi ssi oner of the Alaska Depart-
nent of Natural Resources it will be state policy for the management of
state lands in the Tanana Basin. All decisions {land disposals, classi-
fications, timber sales, mineral leasing and all other actions on state
lands) shall comply with the provisions of this plan.
The land use designations made in this plan will be officially
established in state records through the state's land classification
system. The system i s a formal record of the primary uses for whi ch each
parcel of state land will be managed. These classifications will be
shawn on status plats which are available for public use at various
offices of the Department of Natural Resources. These plats Hill indi-
cate the priMary uses desi gnated by this pl an and wi 11 refer the rea der
to the plan for more detailed information, including secondary land uses
a"nd land management guidelines.
Another important step in DNR's implementation of this plan will be
more detailed planning for specifie management units in the study area.
These detailed plans are referred ta as "management plans" as distin-
guished from this document which is an "area plan." An area plan sets
forth permitted land uses, related policies and management guidelines but
at less detail than" a management plan. For example, an area plan does
not design individual land disposals, pinpoint the location of new roads
or utility' lines, or establish the schedule for timber sales. These
design and schedul i ng decisions on state 1 ands are addressed by manage-
ment plans which implement the provisions of an area plan on a site
specifie basis. Chapter IV includes a list of the management plans
necessary for implementation of the Tanana Basin Area Plan.
F. Modification of the Plan
A plan can never be sa comprehensive and visionary as to provide
solutions to all land use problems, nor can it be inflexible. Therefore,
the land use designations, the policies, and the r1anagement guidelines of
this plan may be changed if conditions warrant. The plan will be period-
ically updated as new data become available and as changing social and
economie conditions place different demands on public lands. An inter-
agency planning tean will coordinate periodic review of this plan when
the Al as ka Department of Natural Resources consi ders it necessary. The
plan review wi11 include meetings \>lith a11 interested groups and the
general public.
In addition to periodic review, modification of the plan or excep-
tions to its provisions may be proposed at any time by members of the
public or government agencies. Appendix I presents procedures for amend-
ments to and minor modifications of the plan which will be followed by
the Department of Natural Resources with regard to state-ovmed land
within the Tanana Basin. Appendix II also presents procedures for making
special exceptions to the provisions of the plan when modifications are
not necessary or appropriate.
1·9
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: (chapterl) 11
Il. SUMMARY OF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
The Ta nana Basin Are a Pl an determines the major 1 and uses on state
lands within the study area. These uses are described in a management
intent statement for each management unit. In addition, the plan sets
the management guidelines by which potentially conflicting uses are made
compatible within a given area.
For each management unit the plan designates the primary and second-
ary uses that will be emphasized. A primary use is one that is of major
tmportance; the unit will be managed to encourage its use, conservation,
and/or development. A secondary use is permitted when its occurrence
will not adversely affect achieving the objectives for the primary uses.
The following section summarizes the land use designations made for
each of six resources: agriculture, fish & wildlife, forestry, subsur-
face, recreation and settlement (land sales).
A. Agriculture
Most potential agricultural lands in the Tanana Basin lie in the
Lower Tanana, Parks Hi ghway and Kant i shna subregi ons. These a reas are
likely to be primarily class II, III and IV soils as defined by the Soil
Conservation Service. These soils have the fewest natural limitations,
such as wetness, steepness etc., for farming. Although not always suit-
able for farming because of extreme isolation, these soils are the
state•s best potential farm land. The estimates of cultivable soils in
most of the Basin are still tentative because they are based on explora-
tory, not detailed, soil surveys.
Soils in the study area that are further than six miles from access
are not recommended in this plan for near term sale. This is because of
the expense of providing roads to these remote areas and the administra-
tion•s policy of emphasizing the development of farm land already in
private hands or state lands close to the road system. The plan instead
stresses protecting the option of using these potential agricultural
lands for possible future agricultural use. A resource management desig-
nation is used in these areas to protect this option. A total of 628,000
acres have been placed in this category (high value resource manage-
ment). Although other uses on these lands, such as forestry, recreation
and habitat enhancement are permitted, nothing may be done that precludes
future agricultural use until the plan is amended and the land reclassi-
fied. A resource management designation does not, however, commit the
land to agricultural use: the land may be evaluated for several possible
uses based on additional information, improved access or changing social
1·10
.....
-
-
"""
~
..,
~~!!<ii
-
--
loiiiî1
ltil!iiÎ
._
"'"
"-
-
-
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
._
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: (chapterl) 12
and economie conditions. It should be noted that sorne resource manage-
ment lands are open ta mineral entry. If mining activities or claims on
these lands increase significantly, the potential for agricultural devel-
opment may be reduced.
In accessible portions of the Basin that are within six miles of a
raad, this plan designates approximately 84,800 acres of state land for
small-scale agricultural disposals. (This includes areas delineated
within the Nenana-Totchaket and Delta-Salcha Area Plans for small-scale
agricultural sales).
Improved pasture grazing is a permitted use on these lands and it
will be considered on a case-by-case basis in most of the remaining land
in the Basin (see also Chapter 2 -Grazing Policies). Unimproved pasture
grazing is a permitted use in most road-accessed areas, as well as in
much of the lowland remote areas of the Basin. Unimproved pasture
grazing is not permitted in many of the highland areas of the Basin due
to conflicts with grizzly bears and other fish and wildlife values.
SMALL-SCALE AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL HOMESTEAD
LAND DISPOSAL SCHEDULE
PROJECT SUBREGION ACRES
MANAGEMENT UNIT
Eielson Ag FNSB-r 2,000
Goldstream Ag LWTN-k 17,350
Kobe Ag PARK-f 6,330
Two Mile Lake Ag LWTN-k 2,500
Windy Ag PARK-f 5,800
Aggie Creek East Ag FNSB-q 1,500
Tatalina Ag LWTN-n 2,500
Ju 1 i us Creek Ag PARK-j 1000
Lost Ag LWTN-1 1,000
Chump Ag PARK-f 1,000
Globe Creek Ag LWTN-n 500
Wilbur Ag LWTN-m 1,000
Snoshoe Pass Ag LWTN-n 2,500
Tok Ag UT AN-d 1000
Wilbur Jr. Ag LWTN-m 750
Nenana-Totchaket Area Plan 29,480
Delta-Salcha Area Plan 8,626
TOTAL 84,836
----------------~------------------· --------··-··----------------------~--------···-
1·11
TEXTNAME: TBAP {R)P: (chapterl) 13
B. Fish and Wildlife
Most areas with high habitat values are protected through the desig-
nation of habitat as a pri mary use and/or through the a pp 1 i cati on of
guidelines that mitigate the effects of development activities. As a
result, under the land use pattern recommended in this plan, significant
areas of habitat will continue to support populations of fish and wild-
life species.
Ta reduce the negative effects of land sales on fish and wildlife,
sales of public land are concentrated in presently accessible areas where
considerable private land already exists, or in areas that are not of
extremely high value to fish and wildlife.
Areas of pri nci pa 1 con cern for the protection of fi sh and wildi fe
habitat which have been designated fish and wildlife in this plan include
the wetlands south of Lake Minchumina, Fish Lake, the Tanana Flats, the
Stampede Trai 1 a rea and the Chen a and Sa 1 cha Ri ver cor ri dors. Three
areas are recommended for legislative designation: the Toklat spawning
habitat as critical habitat; Minto Flats and the area around Mt.
Neuberger near Tok for Special Wildlife Management Areas.
Habitat designations are recommended for 99% of the critical habitat
areas and 84% of the other habitat areas identified by the Alaska Depart-
ment of Fish and Game as important for wildlife production. Other
retained lands in multiple use management will also support wildlife
values.
c. Forestry
In the Tanana Basin the majority of the best forested land was
reserved in the Tanana Valley State Forest. The State Forest should
adequately meet the need for commercial and personal use timber products
over the next 20 years.
Most of the remaining high quality forested land in the Basin that
was not included in the State Forest system has been retained in public
ownership. Of all lands in the Basin with forest potential 73% are in
the State Forest and an additional 25% are designated for forestry as a
primary use. Thus, about 98% of the land with forest values has been
identified for forestry. In addition, almost all retained lands are
managed for multiple use including harvest of forest products.
1-12
iiPl
W!ii
'*"'
-
-
.....,
~
•
-
w
-
loiiill
~
-
.... _ .... _.._ ....., ____ "_·-~----~------·'1">!%1 ... -J )S:J ·""""""'~
~
-
-
-
""""
-
-
~
1 ·-
._
~
-
-
~"*""
-
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: (chapter1) 14
O. Recreation
Recreational activities occur in most areas of the Basin. Areas of
particular recreational interest, however, are trails and river and
certain large relatively untouched areas used for hunting, fishing and
trapping. Recreation values are protected largely through public reten-
tion and multiple use management.
All identified trails of local, regional or statewide significance
in the Tanana Basin wi 11 be protected through the use of publ icly owned
buffers. Two trails of particular importance, the Chena Hot Springs
Winter Trail and the Circle-Fairbanks Trail, are recommended for legisla-
tive designation as State Trails.
Rivers with recreational value are generally protected through the
use publicly owned buffers. Easements are used to protect public access
when land is sold near a water body. A minimum building setback of 100
feet is also required for all disposals that occur near a river. In this
plan, two of the rivers in the Basin are considered to possess character-
istics outstanding enough to warrant the protection of legislative desig-
nation. The rivers proposed for this status are the Chatanika and the
Nenana. Several smaller sites and access sites to recreational opportun-
ities provided by trails and rivers are also recommended for single use
recreation management by the Division of Parks.
Recreation i s des i gnated as ei th er a pri mary or secondary use in
most areas of the Basin that receive significant recreational use. Under
the land use pattern recommended in this plan, most significant recrea-
tion opportunities currently enjoyed by Interior residents will continue
to be available. Two and one-half million acres of the 12.5 million
acres of state owned land in the Basin will be retained and managed for
multiple use emphasizing recreation. Other retained lands which are
managed for multiple use will also be available for recreational use.
E. Sett lement
This plan will result in almost 230,000 net acres of land being
avai lable for private ownership over the next 20 years. These areas are
shawn on Map 1. Approximately 33,000 of this total will be for subdivis-
ions; 110,000 acres for fee homesteading and 85,000 acres for small-scale
agriculture or agriculture homesteading.
Table 1 on the following page presents the estimated net acreage
designated for settlement in each of the 8 subregions in the Basin.
1·13
':"' ....
~
( t
TEXTNAME: TBAP (R)P: (chapter1) 15
Table 1
Subregional Disposal Recommendations By Category of Disposal (net acres}
Subdivisions Fee Homesteads
Region
New Reoffer New Reoffer
Fairbanks NSB 8587 1534 13120 9140
Lower Tanana 2500 1076 16350 7000
Kantishna 1100 744 22400 8800
Parks Highway 2829 3831 16640 5400
Upper Tanana 3175 1662 2600 250
Goodpaster 0 0 3400 0
East Alaska Range 150 0 0 0
West Alaska Range 650 0 0 0
Delta Salcha Plan 2572 1648 2417 1000
Nenana Totchaket 500 367 1500 0
Plan
TOTAl 22,063 10,862 78,427 31,590
l. t 1 ( t
Agriculture
New Reoffer
20850 0
10750 0
0 0
14130 0
1000 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
8626 0
29480 0
84,836 000
1<
New
42,557
29,600
23,500
33,599
6,775
3,400
150
650
13,615
31,480
185,326
Total
411 lli
Reoffer
10,674
8,076
9,544
9,231
1,912
000
000
000
2,648
367
42,452
1
TOTAl
53,231
37,676
33,044
42,830
8,687
3,400
150
650
1
16,263
31,847
227,778
(, ' 1_
-
,_
~
~.,.,..
-
-
~~
-
-
' -
-
F. Subsurface Resources
The overall impact of this plan on mineral exploration and develop-
rnent is strongly positive. Ninety-eight percent of the known Mineralized
areas in the Basin are open to mineral entry. It was a major objective
of this plan not only ta keep these areas open to mineral entry but also
ta enphasize mineral development in their day-ta-day management.
Due ta this approach, there is much less risk of mineral closures in
highly rnineralized areas in the future. Also, mining companies will have
more certainty in what types of restrictions, if any, they v~ill face in
different regions.
With few exceptions, the area closed ta mineral entry in this plan
does not occur in areas with high potential (see r-1ap 2). A total of
891,000 acres is recommended for closure; 559,000 due to land sales,
60,000 due ta very high recreation values and 272,000 due ta very impor-
tant wildlife values. About 2,000 acres are closed due ta proposed land
sales in mineralized areas; the rernaining closures are not located in
known mineralized areas.
Another 100,000 acres are open only to leasehold location to protect
Oall sheep mineral licks. Leasehold location in these areas will protect
the habitat values \~hile still a11owing for exploration and developnent.
Coal prospecting and leasing is allowed throughout the Basin except
in areas proposed for sale (a total of 559,000 acres).
Oi 1 and gas 1 eas i ng i s a ll m1ed throughout the Basin. HoHever,
directional or seasonal drilling restrictions are recomJ•Jended in a fe\/
critical habitats and recreational river corridors.
1-15
D
[?221
D
LEGEND
Lands Not Owned
by the State of Alaska
Lands Covered by
Existing State Plans
Legislatively-Designated
State Forest
State Lands to be Sold
by the Y ear 2000 •
State Lands to be Retained
in Public Ownership
• State lands to be sold will be
closed to mineral entry and
coalleasing.
~
0 6 12 18 24
SCALE IN MILES
~
\
~ ,
L-:1
' \ ...
TANANA BASIN
AREAPLAN
MAPl
Summary of the
Surface Designations
Made in this Plan
WRANGELL-ST. ELIAS NATIONAL
PARK & PRESERVE
1984
D
t?Z2J
0 D
0
D
LEGEND
Lands Not Owned
by the State of Alaska
Lands Covered by
Existing State Plans
Legislatively-Designated
State Forest (Forest is
open to mineral entry)
State Lands Open to
Mineral Entry through
Leasehold Location
State Lands Closed
to Mineral Entry*
State Lands Open
to Mineral Entry and
Mineral Leasing* *
• State lands to be sold will also
be closed to coalleasing
(See Map 1).
• • Ali state land in the Basin
is open to oil and gas leasing.
~
0 6 12 18 24
SCALE IN MILES
~ 1
1
TANANA BASIN
AREAPLAN
MAP2
Summary of the
Subsurface
Designations
Made in this Plan
WRANGELL-ST. ELIAS NATIONAL
PARK & PRESERVE
1984
S~J=>TIOd
lU~m~8mrew pue'}
~PJ.M.E~.JV
'-'
-
,_
-
"-
....
-
-
-
"-
--
._.
--------·~,~~~~~·~--· ~~. -~_, ____ ,,""'>l>W!I'~~-mm~~~·~-~·-·-----
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
INTRODUCTION
This chapter contains draft land management policies for each of the
major resource or land use categories affected by the plan: agriculture,
fish and wildlife habitat, forestry, recreation, settlement, subsurface
resources, and transportation. These policies will apply to state land
throughout the region.
In addition, Chapter 2 also presents region-wide management guidelines
for several specifie land management concerns: instream flow, lakeshore
management, public access, remote cabin permits, stream corridors, trail
management, wetland management, and "Resource Management" areas.
These policies are intended to ensure that natural resource management in
the Tanana Basin is consistent with management in similar situations
elsewhere around the state. Relevant policies also will be presented in
the Susitna area plan public review draft to be issued in July. These
plans provide a testing ground for the policies by allowing people to see
how they are applied to local areas. Following review and subsequent
revision, those policies that have statewide application will be included
in the next edition of the Statewide Natural Resources Plan to be pub-
lished later this year •
Most of the policies in this chapter have been preliminarily agreed to by
the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) and other agencies
including the Alaska Departments of Fish and Game, Transportation and
Public Facilities, and Environmental Conservation, and the Fairbanks
North Star Borough. A few exceptions are noted in the text. Further
consideration of all the policies by agencies will occur in response to
comments received by the public over the next months.
The draft policies on Settlement (state land disposai) are a major excep-
tion to this concensus, since no change has been made to them since they
were first circulated by ADNR in December 1983, in a publication
entitled, "Proposed Policies to Guide State Land Offerings and Dispo-
sals." At that time the department stated it would include and test
these settlement policies in the Tanana and Susitna area plans.
Following revision of the Settlement policies based on all comments, ADNR
intends to issue an up-dated version of the December 1983, publication
prior to finalizing the area plans. This additional step is to give the
public an opportunity to review a concensus position of ADNR and other
agencies on Settlement policies, as can now be done for other policies in
this current draft plan.
The policies in this chapter consist of goals and management guidelines,
which tie together the general conditions the plan is trying to achieve
(goals) and specifie directives that can be applied on the ground by land
managers as development occurs (guidelines).
2·1
The terms Goal and Hanagement Guideline are defined below.
Goal: A general statement of intent • usually not quantifia ble nor
having a specified date of completion. Goals identify desired long-
range conditions.
Management Guidelines: Specifie management standards or procedures
to be followed in carrying out goals. Guide li nes are intended to be
sufficiently detailed to guide on-the-ground decisions, such as how
far development must be set back from a stream. Guidelines are
applied frequently in day-ta-day management decisions.
2·2
u
-
~
-
lltllli
-
~
-
~
--
--
"""'
-
-
·-
-
-
-
-
'-
-
-
"-
'-
~--~--------~--------------------~--------~··
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
AGRICULTURE
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. Economie Development. Diversify and strengthen the state's
economy by increasing the availability of competitively priced
Alaskan food products through:
1. encouraging expanded production and availabili ty of competi-
tively priced farm products from existing agricultural lands;
2. increasing acres available for agricultural production for both
in-state and export production;
3. preserving the future option to use potential agricultural
lands for agricultural uses.
B. Agrarian Lifestyle. Provide the opportunity for Alaskans to
pursue an agrarian lifestyle.
C. Conservation of Agricultural Resources and Protection of the
Environment. Design all agricultural projects in a manner that
maintains or enhances the productive capability of the soil and
protects or enhances the quality of the natural environment.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Disposal of Agricultural Development Rights. Agricultural deve-
lopment rights only will be conveyed to private ownership for
state lands that are designated for agricultural use.
B. Farm Development Schedules and Conservation Plans. When agricul-
tural development rights are conveyed to private ownership, terms
of conveyance will include the requirement for a farm development
schedule and farm conservation plan. Conservation plans will be
developed and approved by ADNR in consultation with ADF&G prior to
farm development. The plans will incorporate soil, water and
wildlife conservation practices as developed by the ses and other
affected agencies. ADF&G's technical assistence to farmers and
soil conservation subdistricts in the preparation of farm conser-
vation plans will be the primary means of encorporating fish and
wildlife concerns into these plans.
C. Agricultural Disposai Program. Large blocks of designated agri-
cultural lands (2,000 acres or more of generally continguous
parcels) should be used primarily to support commercial farming
under the state's standard agricultural land disposai program
(rather than under the homestead program, which limits farm size
to 160 acres, and imposes a relatively lenient development
schedule). Scattered, smaller parcels of designated agricultural
lands should be considered for disposai under the agricultural
homestead program.
2-3
D. Protecting Options for Agricultural Development. Remote state
land with good agricultural potential, but not scheduled for sale
or homesteading, should generally remain in public ownership and
be classified resource management to protect the option for agri-
cultural use. Exceptions to this policy may occur when exception-
ally high forestry, habitat, or recreation values merit a long-
term retention classification. Potential agricultural lands clas-
sified resource management will be available for uses that do not
preclude agricultural development or impact other primary resource
values. Such uses include habitat protection and enhancement,
recreation and forestry management.
E. Retention of Publicly-owned Land Adjacent to Wetlands, Waterbodies
and Streams. Publicly owned buffers should be retained for all
lands slated for disposal for agricultural purposes adjacent to
wetlands, streams or other waterbodies that have important hydro-
logie, habitat or recreational values. The specifie width of a
buffer shall be determined after consultation with affected
agen ci es and in accordance wi th the management guidelines con-
tained in the lakeshore, stream corridor, and wetlands sections of
this chapter. A minimum buffer width of 100 feet shall apply to
agricultural land disposals. This width should be increased as
necessary where, because of steep slopes or other conditions, the
potential for sedimentation or pollution is high. Buffer widths
should also be increased where appropriate to provide or maintain
public recreation opportunities or important habitat.
F. Timber Salvage on Agricul tural Lands.
guidelines, this chapter.
G. Depredation
See forestry management
Efforts will be made to minimize depredation of crops by wild-
life. Means of achieving this may include avoiding agricultural
disposals in areas where depredation is Ükely to be a major pro-
blem and integrating game movement corridors into the design of
agricultural projects. When depredation occurs on agricultural
land, nonlethal means of wildlife control should be used and
alternative crops and practices considered.
H. Floodplains
DNR will generally avoid agricultural disposals in the 10-year
floodplain. Where the 10-year floodplain has not been identified,
the best available information will be used to identify areas
where flooding is likely to be a severe limitation on agricul-
ture. Agricultural disposals in such areas will be avoided.
2-4
-
-
.,
IOil;1
1!1!111
~
-
----
-
"'-
-
-
-
""""'
'-
"""
-
'-'
-
-
-----~~-= !!>tt'il! ""OJ!UOll<;
I. Grazing
1. Improved Pasture Grazing--Tanana Basin
a. Improved pas ture grazing will not be allowed in high value
sheep and grizzly habitats nor in habitat categories A-l,
A-2, and B-1 as identified in the Fish and Wildlife Element,
Tanana Basin Area Plan, ADNR and ADF&G, 1983.*
b. Improved pasture grazing will be allowed on those lands
classified for agriculture.
c. Improved pasture grazing may be allowed in areas classified
resource management if DNR determines that agriculture is
the primary value present, after considering conflicts with
other resources.
d. In the remaining area of the Tanana Basin, improved pasture
grazing may be allowed provided that: (1) land included
under sections b and c above is not reasonably available,
and (2) at a minimum the following criteria are demon-
strated:
0
0
0
0
The area meets the requirements of (a) above.
Improved pasture grazing is shawn to be consistent
with the primary use of the area.
The activities will not cause access problems such as
blocking trails or restricting access to public
lands.
A statement is obtained from the Sail Conservation
Service indicating that the soils are suitable with-
out draining for improved pasture grazing.
*The Department of Fish and Game has categorized and prioritized habitat
types for public retention and management. The three categories with
highest priority for habitat management are as follows: -
A-l: Critical habitat; recommended by ADF&G for single use habitat
management.
A-2: Special value areas; recommended by ADF&G for single use
management with limited compatible activities allowed.
B-1: Wildlife habitat; recommended for multiple use, conservative
management, with other activities allowed under strict manage-
ment guidelines.
These categories are further defined and mapped in the Fish and Wildlife
Element, Tanana Basin Area Plan, ADNR and ADF&G, 1983.
2-5
0
a
0
0
a
Fencing of the a rea will generally be required.
Ri parian habitat adjacent to waterbodies With
habitat, watershed, or public recreation values of
regional or statewide significance must be protected
through fencing, unless other feasible and prudent
methods are found.
All improvements must be removed upon termination of
the lease at the discretion of the director of DUill
in consultation with ADF&G.
ADEC recommendations regarding possible non-point
source pollution problems are addressed.
Livestock feedlots are prohibited.
All activities are subject to a Range Management Plan
(depending on scale) and/or a Grazing Operation Plan.
2. Unimproved Grazing Lands
In the Tanana Basin grazing generally will be discouraged in
roadless areas with little natural grazing potential and where
there are no feasible farm headquarters sites. This policy is
intended to direct the department's leasing and permit program
and range management plans · to areas where grazing is econom-
ically feasible and to minimize the impacts of grazing on soil
stability, water quality and habitat. Grazing will be prohib-
ited in high value dall sheep and grizzly habitats. In other
areas grazing will be permitted on a case-by-case basis if con-
sistent with the statement of intent for the management unit in
question.
3. Multiple Use Management of Grazing Lands
a. Grazing lands will be managed as multiple use lands to
support a variety of public benefits in addition to live-
stock production, including the following:
-fish and wildlife maintenance
water quality maintenance
-public recreation
-timber
-soil conservation
b. Grazing lands will be managed to insure sustainable forage
for domestic stock and wildlife.
2-6
y
-
lilollii
-
-
...;
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
·-
-
'-
-
-
"""'
··-
-------~·-------------~-~"-· --·"''''"""""~~-~--~~.~~~~~--~~~~
c. Public access across and public use of grazing lands may not
be limited by persons holding grazing leases or permits
unless approved as part of a grazing operations plan.
4. Grazing Permits and Leases. A grazing lease or permit issued
by DNR is required for any person who releases livestock on
state grazing lands. Grazing leases will be granted for a
period not to exceed 25 years. Permits must be renewed
annually. Permi ts, rather than leases, should be issued in
areas especially susceptible to soil erosion, water quality
degradation and other environmentally sensitive areas. These
a reas will be identified through DNR 1 s range management plans
(see 5 below).
The requirements stated in these guidelines will be implemented
through appropriate lease and permit stipulations.
Provisions of existing grazing leases and permits are not
affected by these guidelines. In areas where grazing leases
and permits have been issued previously, new permits may be
issued and existing leases may be renewed prior to the
completion of range management plans. However, such permits or
leases will be subject to these management guidelines.
5. Range Management Plans. Where grazing is anticipated to be a
significant, widespread land use with potential for creating
environmental harm, DNR will develop range management plans
(RMP) bef ore issuing grazing leases or permits. RlvfPs will be
developed by DL&WM in consultation with the Divisions of
Agriculture and Forestry, ADF&G, ses and SeS Districts. The
provisions of RMPs will provide the basis of approval of
grazing operations plans (5 below) and of stipulations to be
included in grazing leases and permits. RMPs will not be
required where grazing is a minor use with few animais and
little land area involved. DNR will determine where range
management plans are appropriate based on consultation with
other affected agencies, including ADF&G. RMPs shall address,
at minimum, the following items:
a. The state shall use standard United States Department of
Ag ri cul ture range assessment procedures or other
scientifically acceptable methods to identify the abundance,
distribution, annual productivity, nutrition, and seasonal
availability of range vegetation available for grazing.
Forage availability, expressed as animal unit months (AUM 1 s)
shall be used with proposed grazing schedule to establish
maximum allowable stocking densities, with consideration for
meeting wildlife forage requirements, that will provide
sustained range production and condition.
2-7
b. Water Quality Protection. Range management plans will state
how anadromous fish and streams, other waterways and lakes
are to be protected from adverse impacts of grazing.
Fencing may be required to protect portions of streams.
Specifie watering sites, feeding stations, headquarter
sites, or other methods, may be required to minimize the
adverse impacts of grazing.
c. Annual Grazing Schedule. Range management plans will estab-
lish spring and fall dates for release and removal of stock
on grazing lands. This may be necessary to prote ct the
range and to minimize competition between stock and wild-
life.
d. Map of Proposed Grazing Areas. Range management plans will
include a map which shows the location, acreages, and con-
figurations of proposed lease and permit areas.
e. Physical Improvements. Range management plans will show
proposed feed lot sites, stock watering sites, supplemental
feeding stations, farm headquarter sites, fences and other
improvements necessary to minimize conflicts between grazing
and other resource values. Range management plans shall
include, where appropriate, guidelines for the design,
location, and/ or use of roads, trails, bridges and other
improvements or actions that may be necessary or incidental
to grazing operations.
f. Environmental Monitoring. Range management plans will
establish procedures to monitor the impacts of grazing on
wildlife vegetation and soil stability and establish
conditions under which a lessee's or permittee's grazing
operations plan may be modified to prevent environmental
degradation.
g. Disease Transmission and Livestock-Predator Conflicts.
Range management plans will establish measures necessary to
minimize transmission of disease between domestic stock and
wildlife and to minimize livestock-predator conflicts.
h. Modification of Vegetation.
Artifical modification of natural vegetation (e.g.,
clearing, burning, crushing, seeding, etc.) will be
permitted only in the locations and under the guidelines
specified by applicable range management plans.
2-8
.-
-
..
--
ili!iili
--
~
-
i!illli
""""'
ilill!ll
'--.
"""
-
'-'
-
'-'
,._,
~
'-
-
,_
~----------------------~~~~--~~~~~~~~===~-~~-~~-~~,~~~~~~=Q ...
6. Grazing Operations Plan. Before receiving a grazing permit or
lease, a persan must have an approved grazing operations plan.
DNR will assist a lessee or permittee in plan preparation with
the consultation of ADF&G and SCS. A grazing operations plan
will be included as a condition of a lease or permit. Hinimum
requirements of a grazing operations plan are as follows:
a. Cooperative agreement between the lessee and the Alaska Soil
Conservation District or appropriate subdistrict.
b. A physical resource map identifying: (1) location, acreage,
and configuration of the proposed lease or permit area(s);
(2) proposed feedlot sites, stock watering sites, and
supplemental feeding stations; (3) farm headquarter site,
outbuildings, fences, and other proposed improvements.
c. A statement of the lessee's proposed management activities,
including (1) range management practices considered essen-
tial or desirable; (2) livestock species to be stocked; (3)
annual grazing schedule and (4) forage balance sheet.
d. Proposed stocking densities: a maximum stocking density
will be based on DNR' s range management plan for the a rea
concerned (if such a plan exista). A minimum stocking
density with a schedule for achieving it will also be
established as a part of each grazing operations plan to
insure efficient use of state grazing land.
6. Standards of Approval--Grazing Operation Plans. A gra.zing
operations plan will be approved only when it is in compliance
with an applicable range management plan. Where there is no
range management plan in effect, approval will be based on
consideration of the potential effects of grazing on water
quality, riparian lands, soil stability, disease transmission,
livestock-predator conflicts, and competition between wildlife
and stock for forage. DNR, in consultation with affected
agencies, may requi~e that appropriate measures be specified in
a grazing operations plan to minimize adverse impacts.
7. Modification of Grazing Operations Plan. Hodifications of
grazing operations plans may be required if grazing activities
are determined to impair water quality or sail stability or if
sustainable forage for stock and wildlife cannat be maintained
under an existing grazing operations plan. Determination that
modification of a grazing operations plan is necessary will be
made by ADNR in consultation with the lease or permit holder,
ADEC, and ADF&G.
2-9
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. Maintain Publicly Owned Habitat Base. The state will maintain in
public ownership sufficient suitable lands and waters to provide
for the habitat needs of fish and wildlife resources necessary to
maintain or enhance public use and economie benefits.
B. Ens ure Ac cess to Public Lands and Waters. Ensure ac cess to
public lands and waters for the purpose of promoting or enhancing
the responsible public use and enjoyment of fish and wildlife
resources.
C. Mitigate Habitat Loss. When resource development projects occur,
avoid or minimize reduction in the quality and quantity of fish
and wildlife habitat.
D. Contribute to Economie Diversity. Contribute to Alaska's economy
by protecting the fish and wildlife resources which contribute
directly and indirectly to local, regional and state economies
through commercial, subsistence, sport and non-consumptive uses.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Habitat Protection and Enhancement. While recognizing that all
lands serve to a degree as fish or wildlife habitat, important
habitat lands will be managed to the extent feasible and prudent
for the purpose of maintaining and enhancing fish and wildlife
production and related public uses. Procedures for this include
the following:
1. Through interagency consultation with the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game and other affected agencies, identify impor-
tant fish and wildlife habitat and public use areas. Empha-
sis will be placed on species and areas with significant sub-
sistence, commercial, recreational or aesthetic values, areas
needed for important life functions of species which are
limited in supply, and species which are especially vulner-
able to impacts associated with human use.
2. Retain in public ownership and classify as wildlife habitat
those lands which are important for fish and wildlife produc-
tion, public use, or their contribution to the livelihood of
local residents.
3. Appl~ mitigative guidelines to ensure the protection and
maintenance of fish and wildlife or related public uses, as
described in the mitigation guidelines, this section.
2-10
-
-
"""
-
--
----
-
-
-
...
-
-
lliojl
---~-----~ ~~~ .... -
._,
-
'-
'-
'-
""""
-
"-
4. Habitat manipulation through controlled burning, water
control, timber management practices or other measures may be
used to improve habitat for certain fish and wildlife species
where feasible and compatible with other designated primary
uses.
B. Special Fish and Wildlife Management Areas. Plans will recommend
for legislative or administrative designation lands or waters
with special values for fish, wildlife or related public uses
that require permanent retention and improved protection.
C. Threatened and Endangered Species. Identify as endangered
species habitat those lands and waters necessary for protection,
restoration, and propagation of fish and wildlife species that
are now or may be threatened with extinction. All land use
activities should be conducted so as to avoid jeopardizing the
continued existence of threatened or endangered species of fish
or wildlife or their continued use of an area, and to avoid modi-
fication or destruction of their habitat. Specifie mitigation
recommendations should be obtained through interagency coordina-
tion for any land use activity potentially affecting threatened
or endangered species. At a minimum, activities potentially
affecting peregrine falcons, trumpeter swans, and bald and golden
eagles will be consistent, respecti vely, wi th the federal and
state endangered species acts, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of
1981, and the Bald Eagle Protection Act of 1940 as amended.
D. Access. Retain public access sites and corridors in public own-
ership, or retain sufficient rights to lands which the state
leases or sells, in order to protect or improve public access to
areas where there is significant existing or potential public use
of fish and wildlife resources.
E. Mitigation. All land use activities should be conducted with
appropriate planning and implementation to avoid or minimize
foreseeable or potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife
populations or their habitats. Mitigation should include the
following:
1. Attempt to avoid the loss of natural fish and wildlife
habitat.
2. Where habitat loss can not be avoided, minimize loss and the
need for habitat restoration or maintenance efforts. Proce-
dures for this include the following:
a. Include fish and wildlife habitat and use considerations
in the early phases of development project planning and
design to minimize the spatial and temporal extent of
impacts.
2-11
b. Develop siting and design criteria which will minimize
wildlife-caused damagE! ta !ife and property where
conflicts between people and anirnals may arise.
c. Provide information on best managment practices ta local,
state and federal resource and development agencies as
well as to private individuals.
3. When loss of habitat production potential cannat be
minimized, restore and rehabilitate the habitat that was !ost
or disturbed ta its pre-disturbance condition where doing sa
is feasible and prudent.
4. When loss of existing habitat production potential is
substantial and irreversible and the above objectives cannat
be achieved, compensation with or enhancement of other
habitats will be considered. In general, compensation with
similar habitats in the same locality is preferable to
compensation with other types of habitat or habitats
elsewhere.
F. Other Guidelines Affecting Fish and Wildlife Habitat. A number
of other guidelines affect the protection and management of fish
and wildlife habitat. For details of these guidelines, see the
following sections of this chapter:
Agriculture
Forestry
Recreation
Settlement
Subsurface Resources and Materials
Transportation
Instream Flow
Lakeshore Management
Public Access
Remote Cabin Permits
Stream Corridors
Trail Management
Wetlands Management
Resource Management
2-12
-
w
!lü
"""'
~
--
-
llilll'
--
l!liiil
-
-
--~--~------------------------------------~ M=-tt""11""-mmt.-.._~...,----•""=-"""'~~~---~
,_,.
'-
,,~
--
-
l-
-
'-'
'-
,_
~
--
,_
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
FORESTRY
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
II.
A. Economie Development
Contribute to Alaska's economy with an integrated forest products
industry that provides a range of job opportunities, competi-
tively-priced products and increased per capita income, while
ensuring that personal-use needs of all Alaskans are met within
the limitations of the land.
B. Land Base for Forestry
Maintain in public ownership a forested land base that is adequate
to meet the economie development goal above, and is dedicated to
the production of a full range of forest products and associated
resources such as recreation, wildlife, soi!, water and range.
C. Management of Alaska's Forest Resources
Manage the public and private forested land of Alaska to guarantee
its long term productivity and the continuous availability of
forest products at reasonable cast, while maintaining and
enhancing other valuable resources and opportunities for the
public to use and enjoy them.
Protect valuable public and private forest lands from wildlife,
insects and other destructive agents, and protect human improve-
ments and all human life from wildfire.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Multiple Use Management
Unless particular f orms of natural resource use 'are specifically
prohibited, all lands designated for forest use are intended to be
managed for the fullest possible range of beneficia! uses. The
relative importance of each use will be specified in the manage-
ment intent statements and controlled by the management guidelines
for each management unit.
B. Timber Salvage
Timber with commercial or persona! use value should be salvaged
from lands that are to be cleared for other uses, such as farms
and transportation or utility corridors. This will be accomp-
lished by adherence to the following guidelines.
1. The Division ,of Forestry will review proposais for significant
land clearing actions to evaluate whether the timber is worth
salvaging and to advise the Director of the Division of Land
and Water Management on what method of salvage to use.
2-13
2. Major projects that involve clearing large amounts of forested
land --such as agricultural projects --will be planned and
scheduled far enough in advance to allow a reasonable period to
arrange for and carry out commercial salvage of the timber
prior to clearing the land. This advance planning includes
sufficient time to secure budget allocations for timber inven-
tories to determine the most appropriate method of harvest, and
time to carry out the inventories.
3. If timber is not salvaged prior to sale of l~nd to farmers, the
value of the timber will be included in the evaluation of the
land and the priee paid by the farmers, so that the state will
be compensated for the loss of this public resource.
4. Where necessary as part of the most appropriate method of
timber salvage, future farm home sites, wood lots, wooded wind
breaks and other areas to be left uncleared will be deline-
ated. This may be clone whether timber on the project area is
to be harvested in large blacks prior to sale of the farms, or
whether farms are to be sold with the timber .and then indivi-
dual farmers are to be responsible for land clearing and
possible timber harvest. The Uivision of Forestry will work
with the Division of Agriculture, Division of Land and Water
Management, Department of Fish and Game and the U.S.D.A. Soil
Conservation Service to identify these areas to be left uncut.
Identification will include flagging or otherwise marking in
the field so the timber harvest operator can distinguish the
areas to avoid.
5. If the timber is not salvaged prior to sale of the land, the
Division of Forestry will provide technical assistance to
farmers in finding and negotiating with a logging contractor,
or in carrying out the harvest themselves and marketing the
timber.
c. Forest Practices Act
Guidelines for forest management in this plan assume compliance
with the Forest Resources and Practices regulations. That act
will help guide forest management and help ensure protection of
non-timber forest resources. The guidelines in this plan apply to
forest management in addition to the direction given by the Forest
Practices regulations.
D. Personal Use Wood Harvest
An objective of forest management is to provide opportunities for
people to harvest firewood and houselogs from public land for
their persona! use. Therefore, when forested lands are available
near communities and where personal-use harvest is consistent with
other purposes for which the land is being managed, sorne of this
land should be managed to help provide personal-use wood pro-
ducts. (For guidelines on providing personal-use harvest areas
near land disposa! projects, see Settlement guidelines, this
chapter.)
2-14
ilillll
lii!IÎ
--
-
~
i;d
-
-
>Ill!'
i...oî
"""
IWÎ
...
-
'i~lli'l!!l
,_
,..,.
,_
-
~-
,.,.,
\-,
, ____ ,.,...,,,,=•••••'''"'"''''''"',''''"'"''""'"""''l'"''""'"""""''''""''''""''"''-'-=-"'~------~=~~ "'-~~-"""·±: m ""' ':.
E. Hanagement Plans
Management plans will be prepared for all lands where significant
forest harvest operations are to be conducted. These plans will
guide detailed road construction, timber sale and other rt=source
management decisions on those lands operations and other forest to
avoid or minimize conflicts between timber harvest operations and
other forest land values and uses such as fish and wildlife
habitat, recreation and water. The management plans will be pre-
pared and their implementation assisted and monitored by inter-
agency teams.
F. Fire Management
Fire management practices, including prescribed burning, will be
designed to implement the land management policies laid out in the
area plan. These practices will be described in a fire management
plan that is in conformance with the area plan and is developed
as part of the Alaska Interagency Fire Management Council planning
process.
G. Other Guidelines Affecting Forest Management
A number of other guidelines may affect forest management prac-
tices. For details of the se guidelines, see the following sec-
tions of this chapter:
Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Grazing
Lakeshore Managment
Public Access
Settlement
Stream Corridors
Subsurface Resources and Materials
Trail Management
Transportation
Wetlands Management
2-15
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
RECREATION
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. Recreation Opportunities
Alaskans and out-of-state visitors desire and expect accessible
outdoor recreation opportunities. Well designed, maintained and
conveniently located recreation facilities should be provided to
aid the physical and mental health of a highly competitive
society. These expectations shall be realized by:
1. Developing a state park system of recreation areas, trails,
historie parks, rivers and sites which provide a wide range of
year-round outdoor recreation opportunities for all ages,
abilities and use preferences in close proximity to population
centers and major travel routes;
2. Providing recreation opportunities on land and water areas
which serve multiple purposes such as habitat protection,
timber management, and mineral resource extraction;
3. Assisting communities through cooperative planning, conveyance
of state lands and grants-in-aid for parks and trails within
population centers; and,
4. Encouraging commercial development of recreation facilities and
services through land sales, leases, loans and technical assis-
tance where public recreation needs can most effectively be
provided by private enterprise.
B. Resource Protection
Alaska's natural and cultural resources are the principal in
Alaska's recreation account. It is okay to expend the interest on
this account, but the principal must be protected. Soil erosion,
dying trees, destruction of historical abjects, loss of fish and
wildlife habitat, and loss of scenic areas must be prevented if
recreation values are to be maintained over time and not thought-
lessly spent from the accounts which also belong to future genera-
tions. Long-term public appreciation of Alaska' s natural and
human history and perpetuation of Alaska 's distinctive identity
will be accomplished by:
1. Protecting and portraying natural features of regional or
statewide significance and cultural features representative of
major themes of Alaska history in historie sites, parks and
preserves of the State Park System; and,
2·16
-
"""'
~
lf!!lli
llillili
"""
""""
-
""""
.....
-
w
....
-
------,~~~""' ---~-----~~~ "" ·--~--s·---
,_
,_
·-
-
,_,
'<-~
-
"-"
"-
....
,_
"""
""""
,_
-
2. Assis ting other land managing agencies to perpetuate natural
and historie features on other state lands, in community park
systems and on private property by providing technical assis-
tence and grants-in-aid.
C. Economie Development
Alaska is a beautiful and unique scenic and recreation wonder
which has terrifie economie potential in the tourism, recreation
and hospitality industry which has grown dramatically since state-
hood to be state' s third larges t. Areas managed prima ri ly for
outdoor recreation and appreciation of scenic and historie
resources fulfill expectations of out-of state visitors. Indeed,
one fifth of the visitors to Alaska's state parks come from
out-of-state. Further contributions to increased recreation
industry employment will be achieved by:
1. Rehabilitating and maintaining
enable greater appreciation of
resources;
recreation facilities which
Alaska 's scenic and historie
2. Increasing the number of attractions through additions to the
Alaska State Park System; and,
3. Developing cooperative interagency visitor information centers.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. The Roles of Different Public Land Owners in Providing Public
Recreation Opportunities
1. Generally the state's proper role is to retain and manage land
supporting recreational opportunities of regional or statewide
significance. The state and federal governments are particu-
larly capable of providing recreation opportunities, such as
hunting, dispersed wilderness hiking, or boating, that require
large land areas. In general the borough's proper role is pro-
viding and managing community recreation opportunities.
2. In recognition of the borough's role in meeting community
recreation needs, the state should consider eventual transfer
under AS 38.05.315 of certain state recreation sites near
existing communities to borough ownership. The selection of
these sites shall be agreed to by the borough and the state and
shall be contingent on the borough's commitment to develop and
maintain the recreation values of the sites as required by AS
38.05.315.
2-17
-
Be Public Use Cabins.
A system of public use cabins should be established in the Tanana
Basin. Public use cabins should be established where analysis
indicates a need; and where either the state, federal, or local
government, or local non-profit organizations are able to con-
struct and maintain the facilities.
C. Private Recreation Facilities on Public Land. Lodges, tent camps,
or other private facilities designed to be run as private, profit-
making recreation facilities will be permitted or leased where a
management plan, land planning report or AS 38.05.035 finding
shows the following:
1. There will not be significant public recreation opportunities
lost or blocked by the facility.
2. The amount of use generated by the facility will not exeeed the
best available calculation of the recreation carrying capacity
of the area. This calculation will be based on the management
intent and management guidelines of this or subsequent plans
for the area.
3. The facility will be sited and operated to create the least
conflict with traditional uses of the area.
4. The facility will be sited and designed in accordance with the
stream corridor, access, wetland, and other guidelines of this
plan.
Final approval of a permit or lease for the facility will be given
only after consultation with ADF&G and the Division of Parks and
Outdoor Recreation.
D. Promotion of Under-Utilized Areas.
recreation areas to take pressure
areas.
Promote use of under-utilized
off overcrowded recreation
E. Maximum Use of Sites. Achieve maximum use of recreation sites
while maintaining high qua li ty recreation experiences, environ-
mental quality, and safety.
F. A number of other guidelines may affect recreation management
practices. For details of these guidelines, see the following
sections of this chapter:
Trails
Public Access
Stream Corridors
Lakeshores
Wetlands
2·18
liOI!1!I
-
liOill
""""
""""
""""
liEillill
-
-
-
-
' -
' -
-
-
....
-
-
-
-
-
r.
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
SETTLEMENT
STATEWIDE GOALS
A. Private Land Use
Make available to present and future Alaskans suitable public
land needed for the following private settlement purposes:
1. Year-round residences or community expansion
For this category of use, DNR will offer land that has road
access and is sui table to meet the needs of growing commun-
ities. This category serves people whose principal place of
residence --and usually work --is in the area of the dis-
posal •
Where the state does have land suitable for this purpose dis-
posai will be a high priority, unless there are overriding
public values. To address this important category of settle-
ment the state will concentrate its efforts on assisting
municipalities with their disposai programs under the provi-
sions of AS 38.04.021.
2. Recreational use or seasonal residences
3.
For this use, DNR will offer high quality sites with charac-
teristics such as proximity to water, views, good hunting, or
interesting topography. The state will be selective in land
offered for this use.
Although the state will offer a variety of lands for sale
commensurate with demand, expenditures of time and money will
be directed toward identifying high amenity disposals.
The state also will provide the opportunity for private con-
struction of cabins on state-owned land under a remote cabin
permit program. Although not a disposal of title, a remote
cabin permit can have many of the same effects as a disposal
and enables a person to legally occupy state land. There-
fore, area plans and the Statewide Plan will designate areas
appropriate for the remote cabin permit program. Remote
cabin permits are suitable where, in the short term, settle-
ment is an acceptable land use but where, in the long term,
DNR may want to retain land for public management and deve-
lopment and exclude settlement.
Year-round, relatively self-sufficient remote residences
For this use, DNR will attempt to provide opportunities for a
small number of people who wish to pursue a remote, ·more or
less self-sufficient lifestyle. The land sale program to
2·19
achieve this purpose should requireresidency on the land.
Generally, the state will not offer tracts intended to be
large enough for families to subsist on those tracts, but
rather will offer smaller parcels adjacent to sufficient
public land for the gathering of firewood and houselogs, and
for hunting and fishing.
This category, although important, will not be a high
priority in the disposai program because it requires low-den-
sity settlement and thereby satisfies few people, and it is
less in demand than the preceding two categories. Committing
sufficient land to allow individuals to create a self-suffi-
cient lifestyle in effect allocates a massive land area to a
few people.
4. Settlement associated with natural resource development
projects
The state will set a high priority on making land available
for the development of new towns or the expansion of areas
adjacent to such projects. In sorne cases this will require a
decision by the state as to whether leasing lands for a camp-
site or or temporary settlement is preferable to selling land
for a townsite.
S. Industrial or commercial development
In order ta stimulate or facilitate economie development, DNR
will attempt ta sell, lease or protect for future use suit-
able land for private commercial and industrial use.
Requirements for these uses are highly site-specifie, and
disposai decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis as
demands arise.
6. Homesteading
DNR will identify suitable lands ta provide homesteading
opportunities for people who wish to gain a piece of 'land
through "sweat equity." (The homestead program also allows
the outright purchase of land, as was possible under the
remote par cel program which it replaces.) The state will
provide a variety of land types for homesteading, including
land with adequate access and farming potential.
B. Resource and Economie Impacts
Attempt to contribute positively to other uses of natural
resources, and minimize undesired impacts from land disposais.
C. Pricing
Receive fair market value for public land sold for private use.
However, in the case of homesteads and homesites, allow land to
be earned by personal investment of time and effort.
2-20
-
....
-
.....
liliill
lliiiJ
~
lrmil
--
llillli
..
\id
"""'
--
-----~ ~ """""""!l:ltJ~m"'""""""'m;
-
-
-
"""'
-
'-
-
-
....
-
-
D. Fiscal Impacts
Minimize future fiscal costs to local or state government for
services and infrastructure resulting from settlement of state
lands.
E. Community and Social Impacts
Minimize undesired changes in the character of life among nearby
communities or residents as a result of land disposal projects.
F. Coordination with Local Governments
Coordinate state land offering programs with similar programs of
local governments to best achieve common objectives.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Land Use Needs.
Regional demand assessments for settlement lands will include
estimates of land necessary for projected conversion to residen-
tial, commercial, industrial, public facility and recreational
uses, based on projected population levels. The disposa! program
will give a high priority to ensuring the availability of an
adequate supply of land to meet these needs, including an amount
necessary for market choice.
The state also will make available a modest supply of land for
investment beyond what is necessary for actual use. However,
providing land for specifie needs will be a higher priority.
B. Long-Term Program.
The disposa! program will be designed to make land available for
at least twenty years to ensure that Alaskans in the future have
the opportunity to purchase public land.
C. Priee and Terms •
The state will make land available to be earned by persona!
investment of time and effort in homesteads and homesites. This
will continue to result in acquisition of those lands at less
than fair market value. Aside from this, fair market value
should be received for puQlic land sold to private parties. This
does not preclude offering generous payment terms. An exception
to the policy of receiving fair market value may be made in areas
where the priee of land is judged exceptionally high based on the
priee of comparable land throughout the state.
D. Competition with the Private Market.
The state will not seek to minimize competition with private land
markets by changing or reducing its land offerings. In fact, a
legitimate objective of the disposai program is an
2-21
anti-inflationary effect on land priees, which may mean selling
enough land in certain areas to reduce the artificial rate of
appreciation of priva te land values. The state, however, will
not undercut the market with artificially low priees.
E. Protection and Management of Natural Resources.
In its settlement program, the state will protect the economie
potential of public lands with high value for oil and gas deve-
lopment, minerals, coal, commercial forestry, tourism, agricul-
ture and the production of fish and wildlife resources. Excep-
tions to this guideline may be made where land is needed for
community expansion or other important purpose and no other suit-
able land is available.
When the state sells land in locations and amounts that have high
potential for commercial agricultural use., only agricultural
rights to that land should be sold. This policy is not intended
to mean that all land with high agricultural potential will be
designated for agricultural use. Sorne of these lands may be
retained for forestry management or ether public uses. However,
if lands with high commercial agricultural potential are to be
sold they generally should be sold for agricultural use rather
than alternative uses su ch as settlement. An exception to this
po licy may be made where land is needed for communi ty expansion
or ether important purpose and no ether suitable land is avail-
able.
Lands with high commercial forestry potential generally should
not be sold for residential use. Also, land offerings generally
will be avoided in areas of high mineral potential and where num-
erous valid active mining claims exist.
F. Protection of Life and Property.
The state will, by retention of public lands, discourage develop-
ment in areas of flooding, unstable ground, significant avalanche
risk, poor percolation for septic tanks and other hazards.
Public lands within the surveyed 100-year floodplain should
remain in public ownership except where a regulatory floodway and
flood fringe have been identified through detailed hydrologie
studies. When such studies have been done, public lands within
the flood fringe may be offered for sale. Land offerings within
the flood fringe should be for low density development --for
example, private recreation cabins or agriculture --rather than
dense residential subdivisions.
In drainages where the 100-year floodplain has not been surveyed,
the best available information will be used to determine the
flood hazard zone which should remain in public ownership. In
areas where no alternative land is available for development, the
Director of the Division of Land and Water Management may make
exceptions to these floodplain guidelines.
2·22
~
b
w
...
lliiliii
-
~
w
-1
-
-
-
_.
œil
-----------------~,~-· -·-~----~~~--===><~~·~-'''"'''"'tt""__,._"""""""·~"'="'=~-~-~-·.,.""""'"""""'"""",_,___,__~,~·:•\'<'"'~'"'''~"""''"''"'""b'Œ"~~..J>blii ;t m 111:
-
-
-
"-
"-
,_
··-
Lands generally will be retained where slopes are predominantly
north-facing and steeper than 25 percent. This will hold in
public ownership many lands where permafrost is prevalent, where
shadows prevail for four months of the year, and where the vege-
tation is predominantly black spruce. These sites are among the
least appealing residential environments.
G. Protection and Management of Valuable Environmental Processes
The state will attempt to provide a publicly-owned open space
system to preserve important fish and wildlife habitats and
natural areas such as estuaries, shorelands, freshwater wetlands,
watersheds, and surface and ground water recharge areas.
Wetlands with important hydrologie, habitat or recreational
values and adjacent buffer strips will be retained for open
space.
Systems of publicly owned land will be designed to provide the
necessary linkage and continuity to protect or increase values
for human uses and wildlife movements.
H. Protection and Enhancement of Scenic Features
will The state generally
natural features such as
ground open space for
amenities also will be
re tain
cliffs,
in public ownership unique
bluffs, waterfalls and fore-
panoramic vis tas.
preserved.
Public access to such
Land disposai offerings along scenic roads popular for sight-
seeing will be selected and designed to minimize their impacts on
scenic vistas. Unusual landforms or scenic features will be
retained in state ownership for enjoyment and use by the public.
Such lands include islands in lakes, rivers or ocean bays unless
land disposals can be designed to prevent negative effeccts on
the scenic and recreational values of the area.
I. Protection and Enhancement of Recreational, Educational and
Cultural Opportunities
The state will retain areas for outdoor recreation, trails, camp-
sites, boat launches, fairgrounds, historie sites, areas for
scientific study, etc. Areas for both intensive and dispersed
use will be preserved.
J. Providing Public Land for Communities
The state will reserve greenbelts, public-use corridors,
personal-use wood lots, buffer areas, commons, building setbacks,
and other open spaces to help create a desirable land use pattern
in developing areas.
2·23
K. Reservation of Land for Future Urban Development
Public lands will be retained as a transitional tool to help
shape community development by precluding premature private
development on sites intended for schools, grave! pits, roads,
parks, sewer treatment plants, etc.
L. Cost of Public Services
In accordance with AS 38.04.010, the Department will attempt to
guide year-round settlement to areas where services exist or can
be provided with reasonable efficiency. State land that is
located beyond the range of existing schools and other necessary
public services, or that is located where development of sources
of employment is improbable, may be made available for seasonal
recreation purposes or for low density settlement with sufficient
separation between residences so that public services will not be
necessary or expected.
DNR will set a high priority on seeking funding to implement the
provisions of AS 38.04.021 to assist municipalities in their dis-
posa! programs with the aim of making land available in and
around established communities.
M. Provision of Access
DNR will comply with the capital improvement provisions of local
government subdivision ordinances. Where no subdivision
ordinance is in effect DNR will ensure .the existence of actual
physical access (air, water, road or rail) to each new state sub-
division.
N. Local Plans
DNR will comply with provisions of local comprehensive plans
regarding the pace, location and density of land development,
except to the extent that local requhrements discriminate against
state land or violate a major overriding state interest.
O. Carrying Capacity --Firewood and Houselogs
Sales in remote areas intended for recreational or seasonal use
or homesteads will take into consideration the sustained yield
carrying capacity of the area for production of firewood and
houselogs. This policy applies only where there is no road
access and where firewood is expected to be a substantial source
of fuel and/or houselogs are expected to be a substantial source
of building material.
ln remote areas DNR will attempt to cluster disposa! offerings
where sufficient public land exists for the gathering of firewood
and houselogs and for hunting and fishing. By clustering these
offerings, the state will maint ain options for la ter ·decisions
regarding neighboring public land when access develops.
2-24
-
-
--
-
-
-
...,
~
..,
w
"""'
-
..
----~-~-----~--------"--" -----·-~"-----~~~'==-w~~~"------....:---=-'""'~~"''"'"''"""''·U3!t;!o:•,W.Sl!lffl!l!>~~-'"''"''"'','"''''-~-----~"
-
~
-
-
"""'
"""'
,_
"""'$(
',_~
P. Design Review Board
A local design review board will be established when, in the
opinion of the Director of the Division of Land and Water Manage-
ment, it would be a constructive way to involve persans affected
by a disposal project. A design review board will consist of a
maximum of eight citizens and local government officiais
appointed by an appropriate local government official. Where
local government does not exist or is unwilling to appoint such a
board, DNR will make the appointment, if sufficient interest
exists.
The design review board will participate in and review all stages
of design, including location, design of parcel size, transporta-
tion routes, open space, etc. The board will make recommenda-
tions to the Director of the Division of Land and Water Manage-
ment at appropriate points in the design process.
Q. Cumulative Effects
Chances for inadvertent and undesired cumulative effects will be
minimized by a planning process that examines the impacts of var-
ious region-wide comprehensive land use scenarios. DNR's state-
wide and area planning program attempts to do this and will be
used to establish regional land offering and disposai policies
for state lands (see Guideline U below).
R. Subdivision Design
Subdivisions will be designed to preserve and enhance the quality
of the natural setting and the recreational opportunities that
make an area attractive to potential buyers.
The following slope/lot size standards should generally be
applied in state subdivisions (on-site waste disposai assumed):
Percent Average Slope Minimum Lot Size
0-12 1 acre
13-20 4 acres
21-30 10 acres
)30 No development
Other procedures and standards for subdivisions design will be as
set forth in "Design of Residential and Recreational Subdivi-
sions," in the Di vision of Land and \<la ter Management 's Po licy and
Procedures Manual.
s. Easements
Easements will be used as a means to acquire rights to privately
owned lands needed for public use.
2-25
Easements generally will not be used as a means of retaining a
public interest in lands within a subdivision. Exceptions to
this policy may be made where the expense of surveying lands for
retention is prohibitive or where the interest protected is very
limited such as for local pedestrian access. This policy will
minimize confusion between public use rights and private owner-
ship rights.
T. Owner Staking
In areas where severe land use conflicts and inefficient use of
resources are expected to result from owner staking, DNR will
offer homestead parcels with prestaked or predesignated bound-
aries.
U. Statewide and Regional Disposa! Plans
The Department will publish annually a statewide land offering
and disposal plan. It is important that Alaskans be able to
review the amounts and locations of land disposals which would
result from the application of DNR's land disposa! policies. The
statewide disposa! plan will incorporate regional land disposa!
plans and present recommendations for land offerings in each
region of the state. The recommendations would be based on DNR's
land disposa! policies as well as on analyses of land suit-
ability, supply and demand studies, consideration of competing
land use values, transportation systems and other factors of
regional concern.
The statewide plan will present regional land offering recommen-
dations for two planning periods. Five-year recommendations will
be specifie regarding location, acreage and project type for each
year. A twenty-year disposa! pool also will be established con-
sisting of the areas where DNR anticipates future disposals
offerings. Because of the need to respond to changing demands,
fluctuating funding levels and new information, the statewide
plan will be reviewed annually and modified as necessary.
V. Coordination with Local Governments
State land offering programs should be coordinated with similar
programs of local government to best achieve common objectives.
To this end, DNR proposes the annual development of a joint dis-
posa! plan with each borough (for both state and borough lands).
This plan would be based on consideration of the borough's road
extension priorities and its plans for levels of services in
different areas --in short, on local fiscal planning. If a
borough has a comprehensive land use plan, that plan will provide
direction for disposa! priorities. The disposa! plan should
demonstrate what community objectives are being met, and how the
requested capital improvement funding would support a borough-
2-26
....JI
loïiii
lijlli.i
-..
..;
•'
-
-
""""'
..
-
·-
....
-
~
-
"'""
-
""··
,_
"-
'--
"-
----~------·-~-"'---~--~-~-~-=~=·== """"""~--=--~=~~--,_=~~.-~-~~~
wide set of priorities for roads and service extensions to bene-
fit current residents as well as new ones. The dispos al plan
should demonstrate how increased access and development would
serve other resources uses such as agriculture, mining, forestry
and recreation, and thus have state as well as regional benefits.
Joint borough/state disposal plans as described here would con-
stitute sections of the statewide disposa! plan discussed above.
Where there is an ongoing DNR area plan, that plan would provide
the means of coordinat.fng borough and state disposal planning.
2-27
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
SUBSURFACE RESOURCES* AND MATERIALS
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
II.
A. Mineral and Energy Supplies. Develop metallic and non-metallic
minerals; coal; oil and gas; and geothermal resources to contri-
bute to the energy and mineral supplies and independence of the
United States and Alaska.
B. Economie Development. Contribute to Alaska's economy by deve-
loping subsurface resources which will provide stable job oppor-
tunities, stimulate growth of secondary and other primary indus-
tries, and establish a stable source of state revenues.
C. Environmental Quality and Cultural Values. Protect the
integrity of the environment and affected cultures to the extent
feasible and prudent when developing subsurface resources.
D. State Support for Mining. Aid in the development of infrastruc-
ture (ports, roads, railroads, etc.) and continue to provide
geologie mapping and technical support to the mining industry.
MINERAL, MATERIAL AND COAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
A. Mineral and Coal Exploration. Recognized exploration methods
for mineral location (i.e., core drilling and geochemical
sampling) will be allowed on all state lands unless specifically
closed to prospecting and will be subject to the conditions of a
land use permit.
Prospecting for coal may be permitted adjacent to anadromous
fish streams (other than those protected in specifie corridors);
however, if a lease is gi ven, the Depart ment reserves the right
to restrict surface entry where it determines the surface values
are significant enough to warrant such a restriction. Decisions
on surface entry for coal adjacent to streams will be made in
consultation with the affected agencies.
B. Past Mining Land Use. Land use permits and plans of operation
for mineral development will specify measures needed to return
the land to a useful state. Determination of the specifie
measures to be taken and whether or not a performance bond will
be required will be done in consultation with the affected
agencies. Specifie measures may include: storage and reuse of
topsoil; disposal of overburden; regrading of tailings and
revegetation; reestablishment of natural contours; reestablish-
ment of natural drainage system; and, long-term erosion control
measures.
*See also Appendix III for subsurface designation rules used in this
draft.
2-28
-
--
....
-
y
~
-
JiOili
••
,,_
""-."»"'
-'
..... ~,...
,_
III.
c.
"""" ~"<;1~~-~~,.,_..,.~-L~~-~--~--~---~'-._
Access for Mineral and Coal Development. Existing roads should
be used to provide access to mine sites wherever feasible.
Access across tundra, wetlands, and other environmentally
sensitive areas will be managed in a manner that minimizes
damage. (See also Transportation, this chapter.)
D. Unauthorized Use of State Lands. The Department will place a
high priority on taking the appropriate action against mining
claimants who are using their claims for facilities which are
not necessary for prospecting, extraction or basic processing
activities, and which are obstructing significant settlement,
public recreation or other surface use.
E. Control of Visual Impacts. Guidelines will be developed as
necessary through the Land Use Permit or leasing process to
minimize the adverse visual impacts of mining in settled areas,
recreation areas, and in areas viewed from roads. In such
a reas, guide li nes will address, at a minimum, the following
items: control of solid wastes; removal of vegetation; si ting
of mining structures, tailings and overburden; roads; and
rehabilitation of mining sites.
F. Approval of Plans of Operation. DNR may approve plans of opera-
tion required for locatable mineral leases if the plans
adequately address the guidelines of an Area Plan and DNR has
consulted with and given careful consideration to the
recommendations of ADF&G and DEC. Violation of the plan of
operations is cause for enforced cessation of operations, if
after a reasonable period of time a negotiated solution cannat
be reached with the operator, or in the event of repeated
violations.
GUIDELINES FOR LAND SALES IN AREAS WITH MINERAL, MATERIAL, OR COAL
POTENTIAL
A. Land Sales in Areas with High Mineral or Material Potential.
Generally, land sales will not occur in areas of high mineral
potential; areas with claims in good standing; or areas
containing sand and gravel deposits, rock sources or other
similar, high value material resources.
B. Land Sales in Areas with High or Moderate Coal Potential.
Generally, land sales will not occur in areas of existing coal
leases, or are as of high co al potential as def ined in llAAC
85.010. Land sales should be avoided in areas of moderate coal
potential as defined in 11AAC 85.010 except where land sales are
determined to be the highest and best use of the land.
IV. GUIDELINES FOR THE APPLICATION OF LOCATABLE MINERAL CLOSURES.
Locatable mineral closures are the most extreme management tool that
can be employed by the Department to resolve subsurface and other
resource conflicts. Therefore:
2-29
A. Before an area can be closed to locatable mineral entry and
location, the Commissioner must determine that the tangible and
intangible surface values to be protected are significant and
that other management options are not adequate to protect the
surface resources should subsurface resources be developed (see
AS 38.05.185(1));
B. the area to be closed to mineral entry and location will be
limited to the minimum necessary to protect the continued pro-
ductivity and availability of the surface resources being pro-
tected;
C. land scheduled for commercial, industrial, agricultural, or sub-
division sale will be closed to mineral entry and location at
the end of the first year of the LADS process. (i.e., approxi-
mately two years prior to the anticipated sale of the land.)
D. Lands available for homesteading (including agriculture home-
steading) will be closed ta mineral entry and location at the
end of the first year of the LADS process (i.e., approximately
two years prior to the anticipated sale of the land). These
areas will remain closed until the allowed number of homestead
entries has occured. At that time those portions of the project
area with few or no homesteads will be reopened for mineral
entry and location unless it is determined that the settlement
pattern that has resulted creates significant irreconcilable
land use conflicts.
E. Lands proposed for exchange or trade will be closed to mineral
entry and location at the time a preliminary agreement to
exchange the land is reached.
F. Lands reserved for trans fer to another public agency for deve-
lopment of a public facility or reserved as a future townsite
will be closed to mineral ent ry and location at the ti me the
area is classified "reserved use".
V. GUIDELINES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE LOCATABLE MINERAL LEASING
PRO GRAM
Requiring that locatable mineral developments occur under a lease is
a more flexible management tool than mineral closure. Therefore:
A. Mineral leasing is preferred over mineral closure as a manage-
ment option to resolve conflicts between ether significant
resources and mining of locatable minerais;
B. Mineral leasing should be used only where the Commissioner
determines that the tangible and intangible resource values ta
be protected are significant and that other management options
cannat adequately resolve the potential conflict between those
2-30
illl!!l
-
~
-
~
-
-
..,
---
-
llJ!il
-
-
l~
~
~
VI.
-
""""
'~
-
'-'
~~
~~~·-"'-~~~. _.,...~~---"""""""'~
resources and mining (see AS 38.05 .185(a)), or where the state
does not own the land in full fee estate or has previously
disposed of ether interests in the land.
c. The area where locatable minerals will be developed under lease
will be limited to the minimum necessary to protect the contin-
ued productivity and availability of the resources being protec-
ted.
D. Concurrent with the designation of an area as being open to
locatable mineral entry under lease only due to potential con-
flicts between other resources and mining, DNR, after consulta-
tion with ADF&G and DEC, will identify the other resources
needing protection and state the general nature of stipulations
to be used in leases to protect those other resources.
CATEGORIES OF RESOURCE VALUES THAT MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH COAL OR
MINERAL DEVELOPMENT AND REQUIRE CLOSURE, LOCATABLE MINERAL LEASING
OR OTHER MANAGEMENT.
In sorne circumstances, the Commissioner may find that the following
categories of resource values require either locatable mineral
leasing or closure, or a prohibition of coal leasing and prospecting
to protect their continued productivity and availability. In other
circumstances, care during mineral development is all that may be
necessary to protect these resources. It is impossible to predict
the degree of conflict that could occur between mining and any other
resource value in all circumstances. ·Therefore, the following cate-
gories of resource values will be evaluated to determine if locat-
able mineral closure, locatable mineral leasing, prohibition of coal
leasing or prospecting, or another management option is needed to
protect the continued productivity and availability of the resource
in conflict.
The decision to apply mineral closures or locatable mineral leasing
will be made by the commissioner within the parameters set by the
Alaska Statutes. As 38.05.185(a) requires that the commissioner
make a determination that mining is incompatible with a significant
surface use before an area can be closed to mining. The same sec-
tion of the statutes requires the commissioner to make a determina-
tion that there is a potential use conflict before requiring the
development of locatable minerals under a lease.
In decision memorandum #44 signed by the Commissioner in January of
1984 the Department did set the statewide policy that in legis-
latively established Critical Habitat Areas and Wildlife Refuges
mining will occur under lease. Also, individual legislatively
designated areas may be recommended for mineral closure, but such a
closure would be decided on a case-by-case basis using the criteria
found in AS 38.05.185(a).
2-31
A. Retained lands with significant commercial, industrial, or
public use values
Lands with significant coal, ail and gas, timber or ether
commercial potential.
Lands recognized as future transportation corridors where
access for pipelines, raad, railroads, or ether surface
transportation infrastructure could be blocked or impeded by
mining claims. (After the alignment is established, areas
will be reopened if they are surplus land.)
Lands and waters that pro vide unique or unusual apport uni-
ties for the human use and enjoyment of fish or wildlife,
including fishing, hunting, trapping, photography, and
viewing.
Lands and waters that provide significant recreation
opportunities, such as clearwater rivers that are now or are
expected to be important for recreation, key public access
sites, and recreation facilities.
Lands and waters that are the watershed of a community water
supply.
Sand and grave! pits, stone quarries or ether significant
known material sites that could be lost if mining were to
occur may be evaluated as areas where development of locat-
able minerals will require a lease.
B. Retained Lands with Significant Fish or Wildlife Resources
Lands and waters that support protected species of plants,
fish or wildlife (e.g., bald and golden eagles), threatened
species (e.g., tundra and trumpeter swans or peregrine fal-
cons), or endangered species (e.g., short-tailed albatrosses
and eskimo curlews).
Lands and waters that support production or maintenance of
fish or wildlife species which have significant economie,
recreational, scientific, educational or cultural values
which have been given special protection through state or
federal legislation or international treaty.
State game refuges, critical habitat areas and sanctuaries.
Other lands and waters not included above that are known to
support unique or unusually large assemblages of fish or
wildlife.
2-32
-
-
~
-
•
~
~
~
llollli
-
-
-
-
"-
C. Lands Determined Unsuitable for Goal Mining.
There are two sets of criteria which the commissioner must use
in making a decision on a petition to have lands determined
unnsuitable for coal mining. First, there is a "mandatory" cri-
terion. If the commissioner finds that reclamation as required
under the surf ace mining pro gram is not technologically feas-
ible, the commissioner must designate the lands unsuitable for
mining.
Second, the commissioner may designate an area unsuitable for
all or certain types of mining activity if he or she finds that
the activity meets one of the following "discretionary"
criteria:
0
0
0
0
Mining activity would be incompatible with an existing state
or local land use program.
Mining activity would affect fragile or historie land in a
manner which could result in significant damage to important
historie, cultural, scientific and aesthetic values or
natural systems.
Mining could affect aquifer recharge areas or other renew-
able resource lands which could result in a substantial loss
or reduction of long-range productivity of water supply,
food, or fiber products.
Mining could affect areas subject to frequent flooding and
areas of unstable geology or other natural hazard land so as
to substantially endanger life and property.
(AS 41.45.260(c))
In addition to other constraints imposed by federal, state, or
local agencies, the Alaska Surface Goal Mining Control and
Reclamation Act prohibits mining unless the operator can demon-
strate a valid existing right (VER):
0
0
On any land within the boundaries of a
Park System, the National Wildlife
National System of Trails, the National
tian System, the Wild and Scenic Rivers
Recreation Areas.
unit of the National
Refuge System, the
Wilderness Preserva-
System, and National
If the operation will adversely affect a publicly owned park
or a place included in the National Register of Historie
Sites, unless approved by DNR and the agency which has
jurisdiction over the park or site.
2·33
0
0
0
Within 100 feet of the outside right-of-way of any public
road, except where mine access roads or haulage roads join
the right-of-way line. DNR may allow roads to be relocated
or the mining area to be within lOO feet of the road if,
after a hearing, the commissioner finds that the interests
of the public and affected landowners will be protected.
Within 300 feet of any occupied dwelling (unless waived by
the owner), public building, school, church, community or
institutional building, or public park.
Within 100 feet of a cemetary.
VII. OIL AND GAS GUIDELINES
Oil and gas guidelines are not addressed here. Oil and gas guide-
lines specifie to a particular management unit are found in Chapter
3. The Department's statewide policies for oil and gas are found in
the Five Year Oil and Gas Leasing Schedule and the Statewide Natural
Resources Plan. Specifie stipulations for oil and gas exploration,
development and production activities will be developed and applied
on a case-by-case basis for each oil and gas lease sale using the
Social, Economie and Environmental Analysis (SEEA) process.
2-34
~
.~
w
.,
-'
-
..
-
!!di
....
-
'1!\ili
-
"-"'
·~
~~
~
-
----~·-------··----· ~~
AREAWIDK LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIKS
TRANSPORTATION
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. To develop a transportation system which supports the land use
designations made by this plan and is integrated with other area-
wide transportation needs.
B. To develop a transportation system with the lowest possible long
run costs, including construction, operations and maintenance.
C. To develop a transportation system with minimal adverse impact on
the aquatic environment, the terrestrial environment, and
aesthetic and cultural features.
D. To develop a transportation system that efficiently uses energy
and encourages compact, efficient development patterns.
E. To develop a transportation system with a high standard of public
safety.
II • MANAGE~ŒNT GUIDELINES
A. Identification of Potential Transportation Routes. This plan
provides general recommendations for transportation routes
necessary to support the land use designations made. However,
more detailed route alignment and feasibility analysis will be
required before the routes can be considered final.
'-DNR will avoid actions incompatible with the construction of
potential transporation routes identified in this plan until a
final decision is made on the feasibility of these routes.
""""
·~
'-
B. Access Plans for Land Disposals or Resource Development Projects.
Prior to a land disposal or the initiation of a resource develop-
ment proj ect DNR will identify appropriate means of access and
responsibilities for design, construction and maintenance of any
proposed transportation facilities. Access plans will be deve-
loped in consultation with DOT/PF and affected local govern-
ments.
c. Protection of Hydrologie Systems. Transportation facilities
should be located to avoid influencing the quality or quantity of
adjacent surface water resources, or detracting from recreational
use of the waterway.
1. Stream crossings should be avoided when possible. When it is
necessary to cross a stream in road construction, the
crossing should be as close as possible to a 90° angle to the
stream. Where feasible, stream crossings should be made at
stable sections of the stream channel.
2-35
2. Construction in wetlands, flood plains and other poorly
drained areas should be minimized as practicable, and
existing drainage patterns maintained. Culverts should be
installed where necessary to enable free movement of fluids,
mineral .sal ts, nut rients, etc.
3. Bridges and culverts should be large enough ta accommodate or
positioned to avoid 1) changing direction and velocity of
stream flow, and 2) interference with migrating or spawning
activities of fish and wildlife. Bridges and culverts should
span the entire nonvegetated stream channel and be large
enough to accommodate the 25 year peak discharge (where
known). Bridges and culverts should provide adequate clear-
ance for boat, pedestrian, horse and large game passage when-
ever these uses occur or are anticipated at significant
levels.
4. Expedient recontouring of disturbed streambanks and revegeta-
tion or other protecti ve measures should occur to prevent
sail erosion into adjacent waters.
5. Du ring winter, snow ramps, snow bridges or other methods
should be used to provide access across frozen rivers, lakes
and streams to avoid the cutting, eroding or degrading of
banks. These facilities should be removed immediately after
final use.
6. All transportation facility construction and maintenance
should comply with water quality standards of the State of
Alaska.
D. Protection of Fish and Wildlife Resources. Important fish and
wildlife habitats such as riparian areas, wildlife movement
corridors, important wintering or calving areas, and threatened
or endangered species habitat should be avoided in siting trans-
portation routes unless no other feasi ble and prudent alterna-
tives exist. Location of routes and timing of construction
should be determined in consultation with ADF&G.
E. Protection of Cultural Resources. Known historie and archaeolog-
ical sites should be avoided during construction of transporta-
tion facilities unless no other practicable alternative exists.
F. Raad Pull-Outs. Where raad corridors contact streams, habitat
corridors or other areas of expected recreational use, sufficient
acreage should be retained in public ownership to accommodate
public access, safety requirements, and expected recreational
use. The size and location of pullouts should be determined in
consultation with the Division of Parks, Department of Transpor-
tation and Public Facilities and Department of Fish and Game.
G. Timber Salvage From Rights-of-Way. All timber having high, value
for commercial or persona! use should be salvaged on rights-of-
way to be cleared for construction.
2·36
-
...
.,
lii!ili
..
...,.,
~·
-
~
~
-
-
~
-
-
,_
._
,_.,
-
""""
-
-
':"""
""""'
-
-
---·-·-·-·--.-~,-~----~~·----------,
H. Material Sites. To minimize the construction and maintenance
costs of transportation facilities, material sites should be
located .as near to material use as practicable. It is recom-
mended that the State Division of Geological and Geophysical
Surveys and the Department of Transportation inventory and
analyze potential gravel sources near proposed transportation
corridors to locate the required material sites.
I.
Material extraction within streams, stream buffers, and habitat/
recreation corridors should occur only after design consultation
with ADF&G, DOT/PF and the Division of Parks, the Division of
Geological and Geophysical Surveys and ADEC.
Material sites should be screened from roads, residential areas,
recreational areas and other areas of significant human use.
Sufficient land should be allocated to the material site to allow
for such screening. Where appropriate, rehabilitation of
material sites will be required.
Off-Road Access.
1. Temporary Off-Road Access. Permits for temporary off-road
access will require that surface disturbance of fragile soils
or destruction of wetlands vegetation be minimized. Opera-
tions should be scheduled when adequate snow and ground frost
is available to protect the ground surface, or should require
the use of low ground pressure vehicles, avoidance of problem
a reas, or other techniques to prote ct areas likely to be
damaged by off-road areas. Bef ore issuing permits the land
manager will consult with affected agencies.
2. Repeated Off-Road Ac cess. Repeated off-road vehicle ( ORV)
use regulated by permit should not be allowed in important
wildlife habitats during sensitive periods unless no practic-
able alternative exists. Bef ore issuing permits the land
manager will consult with the ADF&G. Restrictions need be
applied only when and where the ADF&G determines there are
significant wildlife populations present.
J. Other Design Standards. For other guidelines affecting the
design of transportation structures see DOT/PF's "Preconstruction
Guidelines."
2-37
MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
INSTREAM FLOW
I. STATEWIDE GOAL
Maintain water quantity and quality sufficient to protect the human,
fish, and wildlife resources and uses of the region.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Support instream flow studies and reservations necessary to pro-
tect and promote resource values and uses identified in the area
plan for streams and other waterbodies.
B. All streams and other waterbodies that are retained wholly or in
part in public ownership for their public values sbould be con-
sidered for instream flow reservations. Additional streams and
other waterbodies may be identified for consideration.
Under DNR 's statutes reservation of instream flow is possible
for four types of uses:
1. Protection of fish and wildlife habitat, migration and propa-
gation; instream flow reservations to protect habitat may be
made for streams that: (a) have significant anadromous or
resident fish populations; (b) flow into wetlands that sup-
port significant waterfowl, furbearer or other wildlife popu-
lations; or, (c) provide the water supply needed for other
habitat types that support significant wildlife populations;
2. Recreation and park purposes;
3. Navigation and transportation purposes; and,
4. Sanitary and water quality purposes.
B. High priority streams and other waterbodies for instream flow
study and possible reservation are identified in Chapter 4,
Implementation. These have been identified because of their high
public values, particularly for habitat and recreation, and the
high potential for conflicts with these values from resource
developments.
C. The process of determining instream flow reservations should
include the following steps for each stream or other waterbody.
1. Identify the management objectives.
2. Estimate the quantity of water seasonally available by direct
measurement (hydrograph), predictive methods (regional hydro-
graphie models) or other appropriate methods.
3. Determine the quantities of water already appropriated.
2-38
--
liQp•
~
~
-
-
~
""""'
-
'"""'
'-"'
-
--------~---~==-__,=-... ~<-· <~ ... ~~-±:ft """" ~~-~-------"'
4. In consultation with appropriate agencies, use site-specifie
studies or other information to determine the instream flow
requirements for the resources and uses to be protected. For
-habitat resources this will require cooperative work and con-
sultation with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to
identify necessary conditions for rearing, staging, reproduc-
tion, spawning, overwintering and migration of valuable fish
and wildlife resources.
-
\::""
... -.
-
..... ~.
-
-
·-
-
5. Specify in advance: (a) study methods; (b) agency or other
responsibilities for every aspect of the studies, including
funding; (c) schedule for the studies; and, (d) responsi-
bility for applying for instream flow reservation.
2·39
MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
LAIŒSHORE MANAGEMENT
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. To protect and enhance lakeshore public recreation opportunities.
B. To provide opportunities for private ownership of lakeshore
property.
C. To maintain water quality.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. At least 50 percent of all public land within 500 feet of the
lakeshore and all islands will be retained in public ownership on
all lakes with significant recreation values; retained lands
shall include 50 percent of the actual shoreline. These percent-
ages may be increased or decreased on a case-by-case basis if
topography, amount or use of other local conditions warrant. A
significant portion of the lakefront land retained in public
ownership should be suitable for recreational activities. Where
feasible, the publicly retained land should include the land
adjacent to lake inlets and outlets.
B. Where lakefront property is conveyed to private ownership, a
minimum public access easement of 50 feet will be reserved along
the shoreline, and a minimum building setback of lOO feet
required.
C. DNR, through its management of land surrounding different lakes,
will provide a full spectrum of public and private recreation
opportunities. While there are a great variety of possible lake-
shore management strategies, in any given region DNR will attempt
to provide at least the following three general types of
lake-related land use opportunities:
l. Wilderness Lake -lakes that will be protected in their
natural state. This will typically be accomplished through
retention of land surrounding the lakeshore sa that people
using the lake generally do not encounter the sights · and
sounds of human development.
2. Recreational Development Lakes -lakes managed to re tain a
primarily natural character. This typically will be accomp-
lished through retention in public ownership of the majority
or all of the land within at least 200 feet of the shoreline,
while allowing residential development in sorne areas near the
lake beyond this buffer.
2·40
•
liOI!I
~
~
~
-
-
-
-
-
~·
-
l!lill1
~
-
-
,._,.,.
-
,_
\:11~}
"""'
,~
~
-
'-'
-
------~--------"-.., tt:!! r.r=1ll3!l:"sztt """'~------~"""""""" ::!!! '"""'---~
3. General Development Lakes -lakes managed to allow a mixture
of natural and developed uses. On these lakes the minimum
lakeshore protection standards described above in A and B
would apply.
Prior to land sales around a lake with significant existing or
potential recreational or habitat values, DNR will determine
through an interagency process the most appropriate long term
management for the lands surrounding the lake.
2·41
MISCELLAHEOUS GUIDELINES
PUBLIC ACCESS
(see also the Transportation and Trails Management
sections of this chapter)
I. STATEWIDE GOAL
Maintain or enhance access to publicly owned land and resources by
protecting rights-of-way or publicly-owned corridors such as trails,
winter roads, river corridors, etc.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Appropriate public access will be reserved when land is conveyed
to private ownership. Section line easements should not be
vacated unless alternative physically useable public access can
be established. To the greatest extent feasible, public access
rights through private use areas and along public waters should
be retained.
B. When an access route is constructed for resource development,
existing public access should be maintained or improved to miner-
alized areas, recreation, fish, wildlife, and forest resources,
agriculture areas and other public resources.
C. Where new or additional access is warranted, such access should
be provided on public land where possible. Where suitable public
land is not available, attempts should be made to arrange for
such access across private land. Possible means of doing this
include gran ting of easements by land owners, pur chase by the
state of limited rights, fee-simple purchase of the land or land
exchange.
D. Access to public lands may be curtailed at certain times to pro-
tect public safety, to allow special uses and to prevent harm to
the environment. Examples of conditions that may justify
limiting public access are fire management, timber harvest opera-
tions, and high soil moisture content when traffic may cause
extensive damage to roads and trails.
E. Public appropriations may be requested to purchase access sites,
easements or reservations to public use areas.
F. Other Guidelines Affecting Public Access. A number of other
guidelines affecting public access are stated elsewhere in these
policies. For details, see the following sections of this
chapter:
Settlement
Subsurface Resources
2·42
-
..,
~
-
-
-
lillil
--
-
-
-
-
'•·••L ..
-
-
~
-
-
"""'
-
-
"'"'""
:,.,
.__
,_
----------~-"< ... .....,.,_ ....... ®im~------• 11';!1f4).:t ""%ffiY l
Transportation
Lakeshore Management
Stream Corridors
Trail Management
G. The following trails are important multiple use corridors in the
Tanana Basin. This list is not ail-inclusive; more trails will
be added to this list as they are identified.
Toklat River to Lake Minchumina Trail
Manley Rampart Trail
Willer Creek Trails
Delta Creek Trails
Chitanana Trail
Cosna Trail
Cantwell Trails
Tok Greenbelt
Equinox Trail
Chena Slough
Ester Comrnunity Trails
Cripple Creek-Rosie Creek
Baldry Creek Trail
Straight Creek Trail
Allen Trail
Glenn Trail
Tanana Valley Railroad
Spinach Creek Tràil
Iowa Creek Trai 1
Anaconda Creek Trail
Colorado Creek Trail
DOT Trail 286 (Moose Creek)
DOT Trail 262 (Nome Creek)
DOT Trail 297 (Fairbanks Creek)
DOT Tra i 1 288
DOT Trail 293 (Faith Creek)
DOT Tra i 1 294
Salcha Caribou Trail
Sa 1 cha Trail s
West Fork Valley Trail
Oome Spur
Moose Creek
Moose Ridge
O'Connor Creek
Airfield Ridge
Eldorado Creek
Eldorado Ridge
Silver Creek Trail
Fox Ridge Trail
Skyline Trail
Jeff Studdert Dog Mushing Trail
2-43
Skarland Ski Tra11
Noyes Sl ough
Chena Lakes Trail
North Nenana Trail
23 Mile Slough Trails
Goldstream ta Murphy Oome Greenbelts
Governer's Cup North Trail
Robertson Ri ver Trai 1
Caribou Pass Trails
Eureka Oog Mushing Trails
Hut li takwa Tra il
Tolovana Hot Springs Trail
Old-New Minto Trail
Minto Lakes Trail
Stampede Raad Trail .
Nenana Foothills Trails
Rex ta Nenana Trail
8 Mile Lake Trails
Ory Creek Ridge Trail
Carlo Creek Trail
Carlo-Yanert Trail
Jack Ri ver Trail
Wells Creek Trail
Japan Hills Trail
Dean Creek Trail
Yanert Trail
Moose Creek Trail
Revine Creek Trail
Black Rapids Trail
Shaw Creek
Shaw Creek Trail
Volkmar River Trail
Knob Ridge Trail
Old Tetlin Trail
Eagl e Trail
Sheep Creek Trail
Mineral Lakes Trail
Cheneathda Hill Trail
Ball Point Trail
Murphy Dame Ridge Trail
Chatanika Ridge Trail
Cache Creek-Left Fork Trail
Lincoln Creek Trail
Bonanza Forest Trail
Dunbar Trail
Ester Dame to Murphy Dome Trai 1
Ester Dome Nugget Trail
Chena-Gilmore Trails
Mt. Ryan Ridge Trail
DOT Trail 303
Cripple Creek Trail
Far Mountain Trail
Jenny M. Trai 1
Middle Fork Chena Trail
Sugarloaf Mountain Trail
Haystack Mountain Trail
Clearwater Creek Trail
Toklat River Trail
Nenana-Kantishna Trail
Mile 400 to Toklat River Trail
Rex-Toklat Trail
Black Bear Lake Trail
Manley Hot Springs Trail
Sawtooth Mountains Trail
Tanana-Woodchopper Trail
Sean Ridge Trail
Roughtop Mountain Trail
Wolverine Creek Trail
Ougan Hills Trail
Hutlitakwa Creek Trail
Minto-Livengood Trail
Dunbar to Brooks Terminal Trail
Fairbanks to Gibbon Road Trail
Nenana-Old Minto Trail
Washington Creek Trail
Stampede Road Trail
Rex to Bonnifield Trail
Rex to Bonnifield Alternate
Healy to Rex Trail
Totatlanika River Trail
Blair Lakes Trails
Bonnifield Trail
Liberty Bell and Daniels Trail
Healy Creek Trail
Ory Creek Trail
Goodpaster Trai 1
Black Mountain Trail
Billy Creek Trail
Healy River Trail
George Trail s
Mansfield Trail
Mansfield-Dot Lake Trail
Tetlin Lakes Trail
Tanacross Trails
Tok River Trails
Murphy Shovel Trai 1
DOT Trail 73c
--
llilli!i
-----
-
w
......
-
-
-
-
-
-
2·44 -
-
'-
·-
"""'
-
-
~
-
-
·-
-
,_
-
"-
-
·------------~~~<Il:$-"''''""'"""""-----~-~~
MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
REMOTE GABIN PERMIT PROGRAM
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. To provide opportunities for private use of cabins on certain
remote, publicly-owned land.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Criteria for the Use of the Program
1. Remote cabin permits will be used only in areas where:
a.
b.
Disposa! of land ,is not desirable or practical at this
time because of public resource values, the area's
remoteness, or the expense of surveying.
The permitted numbers and locations of cabins will not
result in significant conflicts with other forms of
resource use and management (e.g., wildlife habitat,
forestry, agriculture, wildfire management, public
recreation) anticipated for the area;
c. The area is not likely to be accessible by road or
railroad for at !east ten years; and,
d. Remote cabin permits are approved for the area by an area
plan or the statewide plan.
2. Remote cabin permits may be used on land retained in public
ownership, land designated Resource Management, or land where
future disposa! may occur.*
3. Remote cabin permits are not intended to be converted to fee
simple disposa! of land that otherwise would be retained in
public ownership.
4. If unauthorized cabins are present in an area opened to
remo te cabin permits, the pro gram may be used to couvert
those cabins to permitted cabins.
5. An interagency consultation process will be used to establish
the management guidelines for the program in each area.
* The Alaska Department of Fish and Game takes the position that remote
cabin permits may be used to satisfy needs or demand in certain areas as
an alternative to land disposa!.
2-45
B. Management Guidelines to be Specified for Each Remote Cabin
Permit Area
1. Mandatory
a. The density of cabins or number of permits allowed.
b. No new rights-of-way to remote cabin permit sites are
intended to be allowed.
c. Area remains open to mineral entry, unless closed because
of sorne consideration other than the presence of
permitted cabins.
d. No commercial use of cabin permit sites.
2. Optional (Specify as appropriate)
a. Location Criteria --e.g., only particular sites to be
used, prohibited areas, limit on number of cabins in a
locality, spacing, distance from trails with regional or
statewide significance, etc.
b. Allowed (or Prohibited) Uses --e.g., number or
buildings.
c. Other types of access allowed or prohibited.
2·46
size of
~
-
,.
--
\lllî;l
-
--
-
--
-
"""'
-
-
'<o!l!l
...
-
--------~----·----------------•·= " =-.w-•==·• M ------------===--'
-
-
,_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
""""'
-
MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
STREAM CORRIDORS
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. Recreation. Provide opportunities for a variety of recreational
activities within stream corridors, including bath wilderness and
developed recreational activities.
B. Habitat. Protect fish and wildlife riparian habitats.
C. Private Ownership of Land. Provide opportunities for private
ownership of land near streams.
D. Water Quality. Protect water quality to support domestic uses,
fish and wildlife production and recreational activities.
E. Forest Products. Where consistent with the management objectives
of a stream corridor, provide for the harvest of timber from
riparian forests.
II. MANAGMENT GUIDELINES
A. Priority of Public Uses in Stream Corridors. "Stream Corridor"
as used in these management guidelines refers to the stream
itself and adjacent lands with stream-related recreational,
residential, habitat, timber and hydrologie values. As a general
rule, ADNR will set a higher priority on protecting public use
values in stream corridors than providing opportunities for pri-
vate ownership of land. However, the Department recognizes the
strong demand for property along streams and will provide land
for private purchase in sorne stream corridors. Prior to the
disposa! of stream corridor lands, DNR, in consultation with
other affected agencies and the public, will assess existing and
projected public use· needs associated with the stream corridor.
Disposals near streams with important recreation value will be
designed to protect access to and along the stream for fishing,
hiking, camping and other recreational activities.
B. Retention of Publicly Owned Buffers as a Management Tool in
Stream Corridors.
1. When the management intent for land adjacent to a stream is
to permit uses such as fishing, picnicking, hunting, timber
harvest, building fires, camping or other similar active
uses, public ownership of stream buffers should be used
rather than easements to provide for these uses.
2. In state subdivisions stream buffers should, in all cases, be
either retained in public ownership or conveyed to a home-
ownersr association. If streams in subdivisions have recrea-
2-47
tion or habitat values of regional or statewide importance,
or are identified as public waters, buffers should be
retained in public ownership.
3. Publicly owned buffers adjacent to a stream may be retained
along the full length of the stream or on the portions deter-
mined to have high current or future public use and habitat
values.
c. Retention of Access Easements as a Management Tool in Stream
Corridors.
1. When the primary management intent is to protect the public's
right to travel along a stream bank rather than to establish
a public use area, an easement should be used to protect this
right. Easements along streams should also protect the right
to pause briefly to observe wildlife, take photographs or
rest, but not to fish, picnic, hunt or otherwise recreate
within the easement.*
2. Easements along streams should establish, at minimum, the
right to travel by foot, dogsled, horseback, snowmobile and
two and three-wheeled vehicles. On a case-by-case basis the
right to travel by all terrain vehicles and four wheeled
vehicles may be reserved. Easements should be reserved for
roads or railroads only if they are planned for construction.
3. Easements and publicly owned buffers may be used in combina-
tian on a stream to provide opportunities for private owner-
ship near the stream while protecting public use or habitat
values on other portions of the stream. Therefore, although
easements should not be used where significant public use is
to be encouraged, they may be used on portions of a stream
with important public recreation and habitat values when most
portions of the stream are retained for public use.
D. Establishing Widths of . Publicly Owned Buffers, Easements and
Building Setbacks in Stream Corridors.
1. Widths of publicly owned buffers along streams will vary
according to management intent. In addition, the buffer
width for any given stream may vary along the stream course
depending on topography, vegetation and land ownership.
Establishing buffer widths for particular streams should be
based, at a minimum, on objectives for the following:
recreational activities to be supported, habitat protection
and management, noise abatement, visual quality, water
quality, likelihood of erosion of the riverbank (in which
case the buffer should be widened to compensate), and land
disposai.
*The Alaska Department of Fish and Game does not endorse excluding
fishing from the rights reserved for the public in stream corridor ease-
ments.
2-48
w
101!11
-
iaii
-
lllo!i
-
lollloi
'-'
~
-
-
-
-
"""'
~
-
,._,
.._..,
,_
"-
,_
~
"-
-
-
"-
-
'-
-----=-~~.~ .., __ .,.,...,.. .,~.,~~~'
2. Although buffer and easement widths may vary among streams, a
basic level o~ consistency is needed to avoid confusion about
the width of public use and access areas along the state 's
many streams and because it would be prohibitively expensive
to establish separately by fieldwork and site analysis buffer
widths for each stream corridor. The following guidelines
are intended to establish a reasonable degree of consistency
in buffer and easement widths:
a. When it is determined that a publicly owned buffer is
appropriate, a standard minimum buffer width of 200 feet
landward from the ordinary high water mark on each bank
generally should be established. This width may be
reduced to a minimum of 100 feet on each bank in indivi-
dual cases consistent with the management objectives of
the stream corridor.
b. As a general standard publicly owned buffers of at least
one-fourth mile landward from the ordinary high water mark
on each bank should be retained on streams recommended for
legislative designation as State Recreation Rivers to be
managed as part of the State Park System. Exceptions to
this po licy may be made where land ownership, topography,
or the nature of anticipated public uses in a stream
corridor warrant.
c. When it is determined that a public access easement will
be reserved on land adjacent to a stream, a minimum ease-
ment of 50 feet landward from the ordinary high water mark
on each bank will be reserved.
d. In all cases where land is sold near a stream a minimum
building setback of 100 feet landward from the ordinary
high water mark on each bank should be established.
E. Permits and Leases for Non-Water Dependent Uses. Permits,
leases, and plans of operation for non-water dependent commercial
and industrial uses, transportation facilities, and pipelines
will, where feasible, require setbacks between these facilities
and adjacent water bodies to maintain streambank access and pro-
tect adjacent fish habitat, public water supplies, and public
recreation. The width of this setback may vary depending upon
the type and size of non-water dependent use, but will be
adequate to maintain-access and protect adjacent waters from
degradation below the water quality standard established by DEC.
Adjacent to designated anadromous fish spawning habitat this set-
back will, to the extent feasible, never be less than 100 feet
landward of ordinary high water.
Where it is not feasible and prudent to maintain a setback
adjacent to fish habitat, public water supplies or recreational
waters, other measures will be implemented to meet the intent of
this guideline.
2-49
F. Activities in Important Waterfowl Habitat. Activities
requiring a permit, lease, or development plan with high
levels of acoustical and visual disturbance, su ch as boat
traffic, blasting, dredging, and seismic operations, in
important waterfowl habitat will, to the extent feasible and
prudent, be avoided during sensitive periods. Where it is
not feasible and prudent to avoid such activities, other
mitigative measures will be considered to meet the intent of
this guideline.
G. Dredge and Fill in Important Waterfowl Habitat. Permits for
dredging and filling in important waterfowl habitat,
including permits for gravel extraction and the construction
of roads and pads, will not be granted unless it is deter-
mined that the proposed activity will not cause significant
adverse impacts to essential waterfowl habitat or that no
feasible and prudent alternative exists.
H. Structures in Fish Habitat.
juvenile fish DNR will, to the
structures in fish habitat be
fish migration.
To maintain migration of
extent feasible, require that
built to minimize impacts on
I. Water Intake Structure. When issuing water appropriations in
fish habitat, DNR will require that practical water intake
structures be installed that do not entrain or impinge upon
fish. The most simple and cast-effective technology may be
used to implement this guideline.
Water intake structures will be screened, and intake
velocities will be limited to prevent entrapment, entrain-
ment, or injury to the species of fish found in the water.
The structures supporting intakes should be designed to pre-
vent fish from being lead into the intake. Other effective
techniques may also be used to achieve the intent of this
guideline. Screen size, water velocity, and intake design
will be determined in consultation with the ADF&G.
J. Alteration of the Hydrologie System. To the extent feasible
channelization, diversion, or damming that will alter the
natural hydrological conditions and have a significant
adverse impact on important riverine habitat will be
avoided.
K. Soil Erosion. In addition to the use of publicly owned
buffers and building setbacks, soil erosion will be minimized
by restricting the removal of vegetation adjacent to streams
and by stablizing disturbed soi! as soon as possible.
2-50
-
"
~
.....
~
--
-
-
w
-
-
...
-----------------------------=~~~~~~--=---------------------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~·---------~ ~== emrn--w~1
""'
-
""""
-
·-
-
-
-
-
1. Forest Management Practices. Persona! use of timber or com-
mercial harvest within 200 feet of a stream will be consis-
tent with management objectives of the stream corridor.
M. Subsurface Development. See section on Subsurface Resources
and Materials, this chapter.
N. Instream Flow. See section on Instream Flow, this chapter.
2-51
MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
TRAIL MANAGEMENT
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
A. To insure continued opportunities for public use of important
recreation and historie trails of regional and statewide signifi-
cance.
B. To assist in establishing local trail systems that provide access
to community recreation areas.
c. To protect or establish trail corridors to meet projected future
use requirements as well as protecting current use.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Special Trail Corridors. These are trails that require unusual
widths or management practices because of historical significance
or unique values. Management guidelines should be developed for
such trails on a case-by-case basis. As a general policy special
trails will be protected by publicly-owned corridors. These
corridors will generally be wider than the 100 foot minimum trail
buffer width established for trails of regional or statewide
significance in C below.
B. Neighborhood and Community Trails. Local trails which are not of
regional or statewide significance will be identified and pro-
tected through management plans or disposai design under guide-
tines recommended in the Department's subdivision design manual.
The following criteria should be used to determine whether a
local trail should be protected by easement or public ownership:
1. If the trail is· of regional or statewide importance or
connects to a public open space system, it will be kept in
public ownership.
2. If the trail is to be used almost entirely by people within a
subdivision, but it provides more than just pedestrian
access, for example, if it provides a multiple-use greenbelt
for jogging, biking, etc., it should be dedicated to a home-
owners' association or local government.
3. If the objective is to provide local pedestrian access that
is not part of an integrated neighborhood or community trail
system, an easement may be used. This would typically occur
when the purpose is to establish access between two lots in
order to improve pedestrian circulation within a subdivision
where a greenbelt and neighborhood trail system does not pro-
vide adequate access or where it is impractical to establish
such an integrated trail system.
2-52
1lioll
,..,
~
..
-
-
l!iillii
.._
--
-
-
-
-
w
ii!IIIÎ
j~
-
·-
'-"
"-
'-'
""'"
-
-
c.
----,~~~.
4. Where the re is no homeowners' association, for example, in
the case of land opened to homesteading, either a publicly
owned buffer or easement will be used to protect designated
trails. If a trail has the characteristics described in 1 or
2 above, it will be retained in public ownership. If it has
the characteristics described in 3, an easement will be
reserved.
Standard Trail Corridor of Regional or Statewide Significance.
This category includes the maj ority of trails on state land that
will be identified in area or management plans. These trails
provide foot and, sometimes, vehicle access for a variety of pur-
poses. Most have a history of public use and can be expected to
see increased use as the s tate' s population i ncreases. The
following guidelines are intended to insure consistent management
practices on trails throughout the state while allowing the flex-
ibility to base management decisions on site specifie conditions.
1. Trail Buffer Width. Trails of regional or statewide sig-
nificance on state land shall be protected by publicly-
owned corridors that have a minimum width of 100 feet (50
feet each side of centerline). The buffer should<-"-be
designed to protect the quality of the experience of the
user and to minimize negative effects such as noise or
dust from adjacent land uses. Buffer widths may be
increased to minimize land use and ownership conflicts, to
protect the privacy of adjacent landowners, to separate
motorized from non-motorized uses, to allow future siting
of public facilities, to allow flexibility for rerouting,
or to adopt the trail to specifie public uses or aesthetic
or environmental concerns. Buffer widths may vary along
the length of a trail because of the above considera-
tions. The width of a buffer on any portion of a trail
should also be based on the management intent for adjacent
public land as expressed through applicable land use
plans. However, in no case should the width of the buffer
be less than 100 feet. Trail buffers should be designed
in consultation. with the Division of Parks, ADF&G and
local trail committees. Activity areas of 10-40 acres may
be identified along trails for camping areas, rest areas,
etc.
2. Rerouting Trails. Rerouting trails may be permitted to
minimize land use or ownership conflicts or to facilitate
use of a trail if alternate routes provide opportunities
similar to the original. If trails are rerouted, provi-
sion should be made for construction of new trail segments
if warranted by type of use. Rerouting trails should be
done in consultation with the Division of Parks, DOT/PF,
ADF&G and local trail committees. Historie trails which
follow well-established routes should not be rerouted
unless necessary to maintain trail use.
2-53
3. Trail Crossings. When it is necessary for powerlines,
pipelines or roads to cross trail corridors, crossings
should be at 90° angles when feasible. An exception is
when a trail corridor is deliberately combined with a
public facility or transportation corridor. Where feas-
ible, vegetative screening should be preserved when a
utility crosses a trail corridor.
4. Lease of Lands Within Trail Corridors. Leasing Land with-
in a trail corridor may be done only when the permitted
activity does not adversely affect trail use or the
aesthetic character of the trail.
III. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY IN THE TANANA BASIN
In the Tanana Basin, two trails are recommended for legislative
designation as state trails. They are the Circle-Fairbanks Trail and
the Chena Hot Springs Winter Trail including the portion beyond Chena
Hot Springs which is known as the North Fork Valley Trail.
Remaining trails that have been identified are protected by retention
in public ownership and managed for multiple use. These are listed
in the Public Access Section of this chapter.
It is the intent to protect all trails with recreational values. At
this time, there is insufficient information to refine the management
goals for individual trails. This plan recommends that trails be
studied further in an areawide trails planning effort to be started
in FY85. Within the Fairbanks North Star Borough this should be
coordinated with the trail planning efforts of that agency.
An areawide trails plan will address management authority, existing
and proposed uses of trails and protection of those uses. Since
recreational uses and access are not wholly independent, trails
should be studied as a part of the entire transportation system.
It is possible at this time to identify a few trails as primarily
recreational and of a priority for protection of their recreation
resource value. The management of these trails will be further
defined in a trails plan, and more trails may be added to this list
as information improves. They are as follows:
Chena Dome Trail
White Mountain Access Trails
Equinox Marathon Trail
Cripple Creek-Rosie Creek Trail
Allen-Dunbar Trail
Glenn Trail
2·54
-
"""
lillllll
ill!lli
•
û
lliioÎ
-
~
-
-
•
w
~
-
~
,._,
-
,,~
~~
-
'-
"?~
'--
.._
""""
Tanana Valley Railroad
O'Connor Creek Trails
Airfield Ridge
Skyline Trail
!!0 "!!"'l"'illlfill:l1lW<iW~oi•WIIII!<"'II!!'"''''""'"'''"''"-~~~~~.
23 Mile Slough Trails
Governor's Cup North Trail
Chena-Gilmore Trail
Davidson Ditch
West Fork Ridge Trail (Steese Hwy to Chena Hot Springs)
Martin to Dunbar
Big Eldorado Creek
Left Fork Trail
Silver Creek Trail
Murphy Dome Ridge System
2-55
MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
WETLANDS MANAGEMENT
I. STATEWIDE GOALS
Protection of Wetland Values
To protect the hydrologie, habitat and recreation values of public
wetlands. Land management practices will be directed at avoiding or
minimizing adverse impacts on the following important functions of
wetlands.
A. Water quality: Wetlands serve to filter nutrients and sedi-
ment from upland run-off.
B. Water supply: Wetlands serve to stabilize water supply by
retaining excessive water during flooding and by recharging
groundwater during dry periods.
C. Habitat/recreation: Wetlands provide important feeding,
rearing, nesting, and breeding grounds for many species;
related recreational use is also important.
II. MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
A. Definition of Wetlands. For purposes of inventory and regulation
of wetlands, ADNR will use the definition adopted by the State of
Alaska under the regulations of the Coastal Management Program (b
ACC 80.919):
Wetlands includes both freshwater and saltwater
wetlands. Freshwater wetlands means those
environments characterized by rooted vegetation
which is partially submerged either continu-
ously or periodically by surface freshwater
with less than .5 parts per thousand salt con-
tent and not exceeding three meters in depth;
saltwater wetlands means those coastal areas
along sheltered shorlines characterized by
halophlic hydrophytes and macro-algae extending
from extreme low tide to an area above extreme
high tide which is influenced by sea spray or
tidally-induced water table changes.
For purposes of these management guidelines, wetlands are further
di vided into three classes: Class I, wetlands larger than 100
acres and all wetlands with a locatable stream outlet (the stream
shall be cons ide red part of the wetland); Class II, wetlands
between 40 and 100 acres with no outlet; and Class III, wetlands
less than 40 acres with no outlet.
2-56
•
-
"""'
-
-
ifjll!l
-
w
--
.....
-
"""'
....l
-
....,;
""""'
_,
~'~
-
-
·~=
-
~
·~
'-
-
--
--------------------------------·---------------------·---------
B. Retention of Wetlands in Public Ownership. Class I and II wet-
lands generally will be retained in public ownership. Based on
field inventory and· analysis, however, DNR may determine, after
consultation with affected agencies, that a Class I or II wetland
does not have sufficiently high water quality, water supply,
habitat, and/or recreation values to merit public ownership.
Class III wetlands will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to
determine whether public retention or other measures are neces-
sary to protect wetland values.
C. Retention of land Adjacent to Wetlands.
1. Class I wetlands and certain surrounding lands (buffers)
should remain in public ownership whenever feasible. A Class
I wetland buffer shall include, at minimum, a lOO-foot strip
adjacent to the wetland. Restrictive use covenants and
public access easements rather than public ownership may be
used to protect Class I wetlands and associated buffers under
conditions specified in D below.
2. Class II wetlands and certain surrounding lands ( buffers)
should remain in public ownership whenever feasible. A Class
II wetland buffer shall include, at minimum, a 60-foot strip
adjacent to the wetland.
Restrictive use covenants and public access easements, rather
than public ownership may be used to protect Class II wet-
lands and associated buffers under conditions specified in D
below.
3. Class III wetlands will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis
through the public land disposa! process or applicable public
land management plans.
D. Restrictive Use Covenants and Public Access Easements. Class 1
and II wetlands (including outlet streams) and associated buffers
should remain in public ownership whenever feasible• Restrictive
use covenants and public access easements may be used rather than
public ownership under the following conditions:
1. Where the configuration of the wetland is such that survey
along the meander of the wetland would be excessively expen-
sive. In this case an aliquot part ( rectangular) survey
rather than a meander survey may be used along the edge of
the wetland. This may result-in small portions of the wet-
land being conveyed to private ownership. Restrictive use
covenants and public access easements shall be applied to
ensure that those portions of the wetland and associated
buffer conveyed to private ownership remain in a natural
state and that public access and use are maintained.
2-57
2. Where the wetland is entirely included with a parce! of land
to be sold for private use. In this case the wetland and
associated buffer may be conveyed ta private ownership with
restrictive use covenants which ensure that the wetland and
associated buffer remain in a natural state. If there is a
stream outlet from such a wetland, public access easements
shall be applied to both the outlet and the wetland.
E. Dredge and Fill Permits in Wetlands. Permits for dredging and
filling in wetlands, including permits for gravel extraction and
the construction of roads and pads, will not be granted unless it
is determined that the proposed activity will not cause signifi-
cant adverse impacts ta important fish and wildlife habitat or
that no feasible and prudent alternative exists. Where it is not
feasible and prudent to avoid such activities, other mitigative
measures will be considered ta meet the intent of this guide-
line.
F. Activities in Important Waterfowl Habitat. Activities requiring
a permit, lease, or development plan with high levels of acoust-
ical and visual disturbance, such as boat traffic, blasting,
dredging, and seismic operations, in important waterfowl habitat
will, to the extent feasible and prudent, be avoided during
sensitive periods. Where it is not feasible and prudent to avoid
such activities, other mitigative measures will be considered ta
meet the intent of this guidelines.
G. Operation of Heavy Equipment in Wetlands. Permits issued for
acti vities that require the use of heavy equipment in wetlands
that have important hydrologie, recreation or habitat values
will, to the extent feasible and prudent, require that damage to
wetlands and wetland vegetation be avoided. Winter access only
should be used in or across wetlands whenever feasible. DNR will
consult with other affected agencies prior to issuing such
permits.
2-58
;'
f
•
..oj
~
-
....
w.~
IJIIIIj
-
lili!ll
-
-
-
"""
.;
"""'
ig
-
-
·-
'-~
,,_.
._
-
~~
-
'-
'"""
-
·---="""' i!!>idO :!O!L ....... -&ti! =-
AREAWIDE LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
USE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DESIGNATION
There are two categories of lands designated for resource management by
this plan: resource management -high value; and 2) resource management
-low value. These categories are described below:
A. Resource Management -High Value
This designation is used when land has all four of the following
characteristics:
1. Significant existing or potential value for more than one land
use when the uses are not compatible and one or more of the
potential uses requires land disposal (i.e., settlement or agri-
culture);
2. Inadequate existing information to establish the highest values
of the land for the long term;
3. No existing road access, nor likelihood of access being developed
in the next 5 to 10 years. Accessible lands are defined as those
within 5 miles of roads that can be traveled by 4-wheel drive
vehicles; and
4. Resource development (e.g., farm development, timber harvests,
habitat enhancement) is unlikely in the next 5 to lü years.
B. Resource Management -Low Value
This designation is used for lands with no significant existing or
potential resource values for either public use or private develop-
ment. Examples of this category include mountaintops, ice fields and.
large wetlands with little hydrological or habitat value.
Under a resource management designation, lands w-ill be available for
public use in the near term, provided that the uses are not detrimental
to the potential long term uses identified when the resource management
classification was established. For example, timber may be harvested
from potential agricultural areas designated resource management as long
as the agricultural potential is not diminished.
2·59
Resource management designations will be reevaluated either:
1) When plans are revised (approximately every 5 years); or,
2) when conditions affecting the potential use of the area change,
for example, when road access is improved or when better informa-
tion is available on the benefits/costs of a possible use.
Reevaluation will be done through an interagency planning team, and with
public review.
NOTE: in areas where retention values are high and where there is low
potential for settlement or agricultural use, or where retention
values are known to be greater than potential disposai values,
land generally is designated for retention rather than resource
management.
2-60
--
"""'
-
....,;
-
Oi!ii1l
""""
-
-
w
-
l!Uil lU;)ID;)8mJ'CW lp'E;) .JOj
S;)J:>TIOd lU;)ID;)8mJ'CW Pll'E'I
----------------------------·---·---·~ ' ·---------·~
.._
._.
~
.....
-
.....
-
'-
IC.AII~/"II'IL, lihlù \•\Jr. \\..liU.tJ'-'-"'"'1 V'-
INTRODUCTION TO CHAPTER 3
In this chapter specifie land management policy is presented for each of
the Tanana area•s 79 management units. A management unit is an area that
i s genera lly homogenous wi th respect ta resources, tapography and 1 and
management.
As was mentianed in the introduction, ta help arganize the planning
process the Tanana area has been divided inta 8 subregians. This chapter
is organized using these subregian baundaries; for example, all the
management units within the Borough Subregion are presented, follawed by
the management units in the Lower-Tan ana Subreg·i on, etc. A map of these
subregions is presented in Chapter 1. The arder of presentation and page
numbers are listed an the divider sheet at the beginning of this
chapter.
The 1 and management pol ici es ta be presented in each management unit in
the area are described below:
A. Statement of Management Intent
B. Land Use Summary Chart (primary and secondary land use designations,
prohibited uses, minerals management and land ownership).
C. Management Guidelines (management guidelines that apply anly to a
single management unit and a reference ta applicable area-wide management
guidelines in Chapter 2).
O. Maps of Management Unit and Subunit Boundaries (subunits are divi-
sions of land within management units; maps for each subregion are
included at the end of this document).
The statement of management intent defines near and long-term management
objectives for the management unit and the methods ta achieve these
objectives. While the land use designations provide a quick picture of
planned uses within a unit, the statement of management intent shauld be
used as the more definitive explanation of management policy.
The 1 and use designations shawn on the maps and charts in this chapter
are not inflexible. Uses not shawn may be permitted on a case-by-case
basis if the Alaska Oepartment of Natural Resources determines they are
consistent with the statement of management intent for the management
unit in question and consistent with applicable management guidelines.
Specifie boundaries of land use designations shawn on the following maps
may be modified through on-the-ground implementation activities (site
planning, disposal, etc.) as long as modifications adhere ta the intent
of the plan. For example, field surveys may be necessary ta delineate
preci sel y the' wetl and boundaries shawn on management unit maps. In
addition, through implementation of the plan, additional areas may be
identified which meet the established resource objectives for a partic-
ular management unit. This plan should not be construed to preclude site
decisions which are cl earl y in compl i ance with _the management intent and
guidelines herein.
3-1
A rel ated point i s that this pl an \li 11 not provi de di reet ans1r1ers to many
site specifie issues frequently encountered by department land managers.
A plan that deals \vith a region the size of the Tanana Basin generally
cannat provide a predetermined ansHer to, for example, a question related
to a proposed communication site on a ridge of the Alaska Range. The
plan can, however, make clear what the general management objectives are
for the area in question and thereby provide the basis for a more
informed decision.
Subsurface Resources land Use Designations
The main policy decision regarding subsurface land use is the decision to
open or close areas to mineral location or to nake areas available for
mineral 1 easi ng.
3-2
lo,lil
-
*
~
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
""'
-
-
Subregion 1
Fairbanks North Star Borough
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5 . Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
-----~_.. -ll:o.~
-
·-
-
-
.....
"""'
·-
li:AII~AI'It.: rl~.)D \i\)1"': ~CrldpCef',j) l.i:J
A. Subregion Il -Fairbanks North Star Borough
This is the most populated subregion in the Basin, and consequently,"
it receives the most use and also has the potential for many land use
conflicts.
Most areas close to Fairbanks have good access. There are numerous
roads and trails throughout the subregion and there are also several
navigable rivers. Principal land uses include recreation, hunting,
fishing, forestry, and mining. Settlement is largely confined ta the
Fairbanks are a.
The future uses of the area which will be emphasized in this plan
include forestry, mining, recreation, habitat and recreational
subdivisions.
1. Ag ri cu 1 ture
Within the Borough, a total of 20,850 acres of state 1 and wi 11 be
offered for agricultural sale.
Al1 of the state owned land in the Borough with known agricultural
potential will be offered for sale before 1987.
Table
Disposals Recornmended for Agricultural
Use in the Borough
Project
Goldstream Agriculture
Eielson Agriculture
Aggie Creek East Agriculture
2. Forestry
Net Acres
17,350
2,000
1,500
20,850
The majority of the high value state owned forests within the
Borough are now in the legislatively designated State Forest, with the
exception of several areas along the Parks Highway. The forest along the
Parks Highway is of moderate to law value for minerals, fish and wild-
life, settlement and recreation, but it includes sorne of the most produc-
tive timber stands in the Interior. In view of these factors, most of
the forest along the Parks Highway which was not included in the State
Forest will be designated for primary use forestry.
In the rest of the Borough, the State Forest should provide for
commercial forestry and personal use wood cutting and few additional
areas will be designated primary use forestry.
3-3
iC.AII'H-\I'IC.: ri''l:::>O ~r\)1"': \CIIaj.Jl.t::f'.)) UO
3. Minerals
Mining is a major industry within the -Borough. The area from Ester
Dame ta Cleary Summit is a highly mineralized region which has many
active claims. In the eastern half of the Borough, the Middle Fork of
the Chena River is also an important mining area.
These areas will be left open ta mineral entry and the areas where
there are large blacks of claims {particularly the Cleary Summit and
Ester Dame areas) will be managed primarily for minerals.
Other areas within the Borough which have several active claims or
hi gh patent i a 1 wi 11 be 1 eft open ta mi nera 1 entry and man aged for miner-
als as a secondary use. There are no known coal and oil and gas resources
in this area, but it will remain open to coal prospecting and oil and gas
and coal leasing.
4. Recreation
There are many important recreational resources within this sub-
region. In general, iireas of high recreational use will be managed for
recreation. These include the Salcha, Chatanika and Chena River corri-
dors, Ester Dome, and the Chena Hot Springs area. The Chatanika River is
recommended for legislative designation as a State Recreation River to
protect is unique values. The Chena Hot Springs Winter Trail, Circle
Fairbanks corridor and the North Fork Valley Trail are recommended for
State Trail s to preserve the ir recreational and hi stori c importance.
Other trails will be protected through either public easements or public
ownership. In addition, all areas retained in public ownership will be
available for recreation.
5. Fish and Wildlife
Wildlife values in the Borough are concentrated in a few areas due
ta the high degree of development around Fairbanks. More than in other
regions of the Basin, habitat values within the Borough are tied ta human
use and enjoyment of wildl ife.
The Tatalina River and the flats to the east will be retained as
special value habitat. The Chatanika corridor is high value and will be
protected by retention and habitat management. The Goldstream Creek
corridor will be managed similarly for recreation· and habitat. The
Salcha and Chena River corridors will be managed ta protect their fish
and wildl ife values. Bath corridors are open ta mineral entry but
enforcement of the water quality regulations is a priority.
6. Settlement
Within the Borough, a total of 53,200 acres of state land will be
offered for sale (10,121 acres for subdivisions, 22,260 acres for fee
simple homesteads and 20,850 acres for agricultural homesteads or small-
scale agriculture).
34
-
loiOII
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
~
-
-
-
-------~--------------------------------------~,..,.. ... =·""""-'._........__.__._ __ ,,..,..,.-......... ~~>'.l'l<W"--""'~"
-
-
,.,..
-
>->
-
-
-
b.<
'-'
;,.~
a. Land for Community Expansion
Land for community expansion in the Borough is usually quite popu-
lar. If the site is within reasonable commuting distance {within 25
miles) and has good drainage, most of the parcels are likely to sell.
However, most community expansion land in state ownership has
already been sold or is otherwise encumbered. When the state land in the
State Forest is excluded and when mining claims,, past disposals, and poor
soils are taken into account, there are only a limited number of areas of
state land left in the Borough which are suitable for community
expansion.
The Borough population is expected ta grow from 53,983 people in
1980 ta 91,400 in the year 2000, an increase of 37,417 people (Soci a-
economie Paper, RAS/DU..JM, 1982). There is currently adequate land in
private ownership ta meet the needs of the existing population, assuming
an average household requires 1 ta 4 acres of land and that the average
household contains 3.3 people.
This additional population will need between 11,000 and 45,000 acres
of land by the year 2000. There are three principal sources of land to
meet this need: the state, the Borough and private land.
The state currently has 1,554 acres of land suitable for community
expansion available for sale over the counter. The Borough owns 110,000
acres, much of which is expected to be sold. Of this, approximately
54,000 .acres are of 11 high quality11 for community expansion {i.e., land
that is well drained, easily accessed and within 25 miles of Fairbanks).
This land is expected ta be soldat a rate of roughly 2,400 acres per
year. There are also approximately 100,000 acres of private land, prin-
cipally in the Fairbanks area.
Thus, there is a total of over 160,000 acres of good quality land
currently available for community expansion, compared to a need of bet-
ween 11 ,000 and 45,000 acres. Bec au se the re i s an abundant su pp ly of
community expansion land in other ownerships, the fact that the state has
only a limited supply ta contribute ta meeting resident's needs does not
pose a serious problem ta having adequate land available for residents in
the Fairbanks North Star Borough.
The following is a list of the projects that will be sold for community
expansion over the next 20 years by the state.
3-5
li:.AIN.I-\i'lt.: ri'I.)D \r\)t-': ~Cildf.ll..êt".:)) vo
Table 3-1.
State Land Recommended for Sale as
Subdivisions in the Borough
Project Net Acres
Bear's Den (Over-the-Counter)
Hayes Creek (Over-the-Counter)
McCloud (Over-the-Counter)
Haystack (Over-the-Counter)
Desperation (Over-the-Counter)
Olnes E (Over-the-Counter)
Haystack (Over-the-Counter)
Wigwam (Over-the-Counter)
Alder Creek II
As pen wood
Big Eldorado
Bigwood
Emma Creek I
Emma Creek II
Fairbanks Odd Lots
Fox
Little Birch I
Little Birch II
Little Birch III
Little Birch IV
Little Wi 1low
Martin
McCloud
Murphy
Nenana Ridge I*
0 1 Connor
Riverview I*
Rivervi ew II*
Riverview III*
Riverview IV*
Riverwood
Skiview
Smallwood
Snoshoe I
Snoshoe II
Snoshoe III
Springview*
Tanglewood Heights
Total
134
465
143
340
146
132
97
77
200
250
150
120
260
140
40
250
150
250
250
250
lOO
1,000
150
204
1,000
200
1,223
100
lOO
300
30
300
250
300
200
400
300
120
10,121
* These projects are not within commuting distance of Fairbanks and are
for recreational use rather than for community expansion.
3-6
-
..,.J
--
iiloili
fil
lli!ll
-
-
--
-
-
~
"""'
~
-
"'"'
ii_~
....
-
'-'
-----~----------------------=-----=----~~=""""""''"'"'"'"''"'""~"' ~~--'
ltXINAMt: ~N~b lK)P: lCnapterJ) U~
b. Recreational Subdivisions and Homesteads
These sales are generally very popul ar if located in are as where
recreational opportunities exist. Excluding land purchased for specula-
tion, the cumulative need for recreational land in the Borough is esti-
mated ta be between 4,000 and 19,000 · acres by the year 2000 { see the
Settlement Element, DLWM,l983).
The two pri nci pa 1 owners of this type of 1 and are the Borough and
the state. The Borough owns roughly 30,000 acres of land suitable for
this use, most of which is likely to be sold within 20 years. The state
owns land along the Chatanika River, Chena Hot Springs Raad and the
Steese and the Ell iott Highway which would be suitable for recreational
parcels.
Over the next 20 years, the state alone will offer 22,260 acres for
private recreation, which is more than the maximum projected need for
recreational land.
Table 3-2.
Land Offered for Sale for
Fee Homesteads in the Borough
Project
Far Mountain (Over-the-Counter)
Any Creek (Over-the-Counter)
Hunts Creek (Over-the-Counter)
Caribou Creek {Over-the-Counter)
West Fork (Over-the-Counter)
Chena South (Over-the-Counter)
Mariana
Mt. Ryan
Aggie Creek
Aggie Creek East I
Aggie Creek East II
White Mountain I
White Mountain II
Left Fork Addition
Net Acres
2,400
lOO
600
1,440
4,000
600
1,000
3,000
4,000
1,500
1,500
1,000
1,000
120
Total 22,260
3·7
l'-1\111111"\tÎI...c II'(...,II.J \,1'\fl" \ ..... IIU.tJY._I~J .... ...,
7. Transportation
The following access corridors have been identified by the Depart:-
ment of Transportation and Public Facilities. There are no proposals for
actual construction of access within these corridors~ but the option ta
eventually develop access in these areas should not be precluded.
Alaska Railroad Extension: A route has been identified, through the
Tanana River and Richardson Highway corridors, for an extension of the
Alaska Railroad from Fairbanks ta the Canadian border.
Twin Mountain Access Route: Three alternatives have been identified
as possible access routes ta the Twin Mountain area. One route is an
extension of Chena Hot Springs Raad (approximately 65 miles) along the
Middle Fork Chena River valley. This was identified as the most feasible
route by the Interior Alaska Transportation Study. Two other less
preferable routes are the extension of Johnson Raad and a new raad up the
Salcha River valley. The Salcha River valley route, however, conflicts
with land use objectives as defined in this plan.
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline: A route, basically parallel ta the
existing Trans-Alaska Pipeline, is proposed for the construction of a
gas line from the North Slope ta Fairbanks and continuing either ta the
Canadian border via the Alaska Highway corridor or ta Prince William
Sound via the Richardson Highway and Trans-Alaska Pipeline corridor. A
third alternative follows the Parks Highway -Alaska Railroad corridor
from Fairbanks to Cook Inlet. However, this last alternative route would
conflict with land use objectives for the Nenana River corridor area (see
F-2, in Parks).
Steese and Elliott Highways Realignment: The Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT/PF) has future plans ta recon-
struct and realign portions of the Elliott and Steese Highway. DOT/PF
will work with the planning team to choose the best routing that meets
the land use objectives described in this report while still complying
with appropriate highway standards and project costs.
Parks Highway Improvements: The Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities (DOT/PF) is examining possible future improvements
to the Parks Highway. This plan does not preclude improvements recom-
mended by DOT/PF for engineering and public safety consideration.
Trails and Revised Statute (RS) 2477 Roads: Numerous trails and
minor roads exist in this subregion. See Chapter 2, Public Access and
Trails Management for additional information.
3·8
-
liioiiiÎ
Pi
li!.oil
l>oi;!l
~.
-
-
-
"""'
""""
ll/illil
·~
--
'""'
~
-
-
"'""
-
-
~
·~~~=-~·~~~~~----------------------~-=~~~~~~~~==~~~-~----·--"-----~-=-~~
TEX'INAME: c3chart ( R)P: (wooro) 01
I.AMl tlSB SI:I4MARl
N!ST EDliiXJ:>B SOBRmiCfl
( Befer to the maps at the back of this docunent)
-~-------MINEIWS ) J----·r-L.w)œ;-œsi~----·-·-r-
PKlPCSBD a.ASSIPI -tarr --œiT/ PRIMAR!' SI!XXNDARr
sœœr.r IJSE(S) USE(S) ---Habitat
A-1 Forestry
Pecreation
Fbrestry
Recreation
A-2 Settlement Habitat ----; ---Hab1.tat Fbrestry
B-1 Recreation
-fliabitat
B-2 Settlement Recreation
r---Habitat ·--
B-3 Agriculture Recreation
I.p.grazing
~---Recreation Forestry
C-1 Habitat
D-1 Settlement E'orestry
r-----:tow Value
D-2 Bes. Mgmt.
ForeS~
Habitat
Recreation -
D-3 Recreation
r-----· !---·--···--Recreation
1----·-
E-1 Habitat
(Proposed
Olatanika State Rec.
River River) -Recreation
E-2 Settlement J!'::)restry
Habitat
E-3 Forestry Recreation
Habitat
Habitat
F-1 Recreation
1-------1------F-2 Settlement Habitat
Recreation
'----~----· -·---"--·
Pl03IBl'l'ED
SOBI!'JICB
USES
P.eoote cabins
Land Sales
InlprOY'ed
pasture
grazing -
Re!oote cabins
--Relrote cabins
Land Sales
Impl:Oved
pasture
grazing
Re!oote cab~-
1------
Rerrcte cabins
I.p. grazing
Re!oote cabins
Land Sales -
Rerrcte cabins
œ
UlCA'l'.IIBLB
MJ:NERALS .•.
c
c sed
..
c
....... _
c sed
--
cpen
1 ------1
Closed~ 1
C9en ~
Cl-;;~ to coall
c :ed 1 Closed to coal
·---1-·----c cpen
-_____ .J
1
c :~~-~~.1 ·-~-----Re!oote cabins
Land Sales C9en 1 Open
Land Sales
Re!oote cabins c
In1prOY'ed
pasture
grazing
1-----
Land Sales
Retrote cabins c :ed Closed
Leases
Grazing
·-........ ----i------~
Retrote cabins Cl .osed Closed to coalj
Re!oote cabins ~~
Land Sales
Grazing
cpen C9en /
-Re!oote cabins ------1
Land Sales
I. p. gt:azing
~-----· ·-Remote Cabins
c
cpen --~---·_j i
j ·--------------"
3·9
~= c3chart (R)P: (wboro) 02
!;
~
G-2
E!-1
1---
H-2
1--·-
I
-·
J-1
J-2
K-1
-
K-2
1--
L-1
1--
L-2
M
IAlll œE &M4ARf
WBS'f llllll:Œ SUBaEGiœ
( :Refer tc? the maps at t."'le back of this document)
p~ ~~~------=-~-~~·---~_j
1----·-PR:&IBI'l'BD IGtT CP fGf.r OF 1
PRIMARl' SI!XXHl!Ul! SURF.IICE ~LE LEASEABLE 1
1
OSB(S) IJSB(S) OSES MDŒRALS MINERALS 1
l . -
Settlement Recreation Remote cabins Closed Closed to ooal;
.--.-
Re!oote cabins
Recreation Forestry Land Sales Open Open 1
I:mproved
pasture
grazing
-· f--· ----....1 Settlement Recreation RenDte cabins Closed Closed 1
to ooal !
1 ·-1-· 4
Recreation Dmpr.Pas.Graz~ g i
i !iabitat Re!oote cabins
1 Land Sales Open Open 1 ----Recreation Imp.Pas .Graz in i
1 Habitat Re!oote cabins Open Open 1
Land Sales 1
! -·
Closed to ooall
Habitat
Settlement Recreation Re!oote cabins Closed
Habitat Re!oote cabins -~l
Recreation F::lrestry Land Sales Open Open !
L11p1:'0Ved ! pasture !
1
grazing i --··--· -, Land Sales
!iabitat I:mproved Open Open 1
pas. grazing 1
i -----·· L:)w Value Land Sales Open Open i
!
Res. M;!mt. i
î'iâb1tat i
Minèrals i
Settlement ! ----+---·· L.:>w Value Land Sales Open Open !
Res. M;!mt. i
laëltar-· • 1
Forestry 1
i
---1----1 -~1----~--l
Settlement Remote cabins Closed ~~~~~~ ---1------·-Forestry Land Sales 1
Watershed Recreation Re!oote cabins Open Open
Habitat Improved
pasture graz~ g
1........--'--· 1
3-10
-
•
--
ll<illl
-
-
•
1 -
-
"""'
"""
------~------~--------~~~~------------~----------~----
,_
"""
-
'-'
,_
-
'-
-
TEXTNAME: c3chart (R)P: (wboro) 03
LAND œE Sl:MtARY
WBS'r J:DUX;H SlJBRŒICN
(Pefer to the map; at the back of this docunent)
IAND œE œsiGIATICNSJ
-· __j MINERAIS
PR>PCSI!:D a.ASSIFICATl
!Of.r PiœiBI'ŒD !Of.r œ OOMr OF 1
1 OHIT/ 1'RIMiœ!' s~ Stl'RPACB LOCATABLB LBASEABLE 1
StliDir.r OSE(S) OSE(S) USES MINERAIS ~l N-1 Iaw Value Land Sales
· P,es. !oÇmt. L-nproved Open
ilâ61.tat Pasture
1 Minerais Grazing
Land Sales 1
1
N-2 Habitat Pe!oote cabins Open Open 1
1 Improved
pasture !
grazing i
' -i
o-1 Settlement Habitat Pe!oote cabins Closed Closed to c:oal1
..:;..__. -Iaw Value Pe!oote cabins
o-2 P.es.M;Jnt. Land Sales Open Open
RecreatJ.on
Habitat
Minerais --Recreation Pe!oote cabins
o-3 Habitat Forestry Land Sales Open Open
Improved pas.
grazing
Settlement Habitat
P-1 & I. pasture Relrote cabins Closed Closed to coal
.llgriculture grazing
Re!wte cabins
P-2 Habitat Land Sales Open Open
'1:. p. grazing
f-'--·
Re!tote cabins
Q-1 Habitat Recreation Land Seals Open Open
I. p. grazing
Habitat
Q-2 Agriculture I. pasture Re!oote cabins Closed Closed to c:oal
grazing __ ..___
3-11
'ŒX'I'NAME: c3chart (R)P: (eboro) 01
LAND USE sœMARr
FAS'r ED!lJOOB SOBRm!Qi
( Refer to t.l;e map; at the back of this docunent) .
LAND USE ŒSIGNATIOOS-MlNERALS 1
1
PlllPI.:&:D c::LASSIPICATICN ;
K>M'l PlU!IBI'l'lm tGrr œ IGrr 01!'
1
tlNI.T/ PlU:MARr s~ SUliPl!CE u:x:ATABU: :Œ!\SBABU:
sœœrr OSB(S) OSE(S) USES MIHBRAI.S MINElW:S
Re!rote cabins ~ A Habitat Forestry Land Sales Open
I. p. grazing
1---.
Habitat For estry Improved
B-1 Recreation pas. grazing Open Ope
1
1---. 1--
_ __J
Habitat Reroote cabins 1
B-2 Recreation Land Sales Cpen Open i
1
I. p. grazing i -----1------~
I. p. grazing
1
c Habitat Rem:lte cabins Cpen Open --..__,
Habitat Land Sales i D-1 Recreation Rei!Dte cabins Open Open
.J I. p. grazing --· --Recreation Land Sales 1
i
D-2 Reroote cabins Open
Cpen 1 I. p. grazing --~-~-l D-3 Recreation Land Sales
Habitat Reroote cabins Closed Closed
Chatanika ( Pl:Op:)Sed Grazing
River State Rec. Leases
River)
Recreation Reroote cabins Closed Closed to (:x)al
D-4 .settlement Habitat
1-------Reroote cabins
E Habitat Settlement Open Open
Imp.pas.grazin __ ..__ -'
3·12
I'Oll
._.,.j
....,;
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Subregion2
Lower Tanana
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
~=·-..... , ·------------=-~~~-"~,
lt:XfNAi1E: Lowerlanana \~)P: (cnapter3) 02
.....
,......,
:-
-
'-
'-
' ~~
-
'-
"-
_,
B. Subregion 12 -Lower Tanana
This subregi on extends from the vi 11 age of Tana na on the west to the
borough on the east and from the Serpentine and Cascade Ri dg es on the
north to the Tana na Ri ver on the south. It i ne 1 udes the Mi nto Fl ats
which is a major waterfowl nesting area and! the Livengood and Tofty
mining districts, which are very active.
The state has selected or owns approximately 185,000 acres, or 70%
of the area in this subregion. The unit is very accessible and can be
reached via the Elliott Highway or the Tanana River and the numerous
trails and mining roads which pass through it.
The major uses of the area include mining, subsistence and sport
hunting and fishing. The many trai ls in the area receive both recrea·-
tional and mining use.
The resources which will be emphasized in this subregion are mining
and habitat. Protection of trails, water quality, and the option to
develop the agricultural soils in the area will also be emphasized.
1. Agriculture
There have been no previous sales of sma,ll agriculture parcels in
this subregion. However, based on the popula,rity of small agriculture
sales in other parts of the Basin and the need for between 85,000 and
740,000 acres of small agricultural lands Basinwide by the year 2000, it
is likely that small agriculture disposals in this region would sell H
offered.
Several areas of potential agricultural land are scattered along the
Elliott Highway between Livengood and the Fair·banks North Star Borough.
Currently it is inappropriate to sell much land in this area for commer-
cial agriculture because of the distance to1 markets. However, the
following projects will be offered ta meet the need for sma11 agriculture
parcels and agriculture homesteads.
Project
fwo Mile Lake
Tatal ina I
Tatalina II
Tata 1 in a III
Tata 1 ina IV
Snoshoe Pass I
Snoshoe Pass II
Snoshoe Pass III
Snoshoe Pass IV
Wi 1 bur Jr.
Wilbur
Globe Creek
Lost
Land Recommended for
Agricultural Sale
Net Acres
2,500
500
500
500
1,000
500
500
500
1,000
750
1,000
500
1,000
Total 1ù,75o
3-13
fEXTNAM~: LowerTanana (R)P: (chapter3) U3
2. Forestry
The State Forest should meet the demand for wood products for bath
commercial and personal use. No additional land will be desigated for
primary use forestry, but most of the ret ai ned lands in the subregion
will be open to timber harvesting.
3. Minerals
Oeve1opment of the subsurface resource is a high priority in this
subregi on. The subregi on contai ns the core a reas of the Hot Springs and
Tolovana Mining Districts. Since discovered, these districts have had a
combi ned production of one mi 11 ion ounces of go l d, over 600 thou sand
pounds of tin and minor amounts of antimony, mercury and tungsten.
Blacks of active claims are concentrated around Livengood, Manley Hot
Springs, Tofty and Eureka (see Mineral Element Map, available at DNR,
Fairbanks).
The largest placer gold reserves in North America are located within
this subregion. There were nearly 40 active placer mines in the sub-
region during 1983. The lode potential for gold, mercury, tin, base
metals, tungsten and antimony deposits is quite high particularly from
the headwaters of Apple gate Creek west to Fi sh Lake and to the north of
Cascaden Ridge east to the headwaters of the Tolovana.
There are no known coal, ail or gas resources in this area, however,
the Lower Tana na Basin may have hydrocarbon patent i a 1 • The regi on wi 11
be left open to coal prospecting and oil and gas and coal leasing.
4. Recreation
The many historical trai ls and the Man ley and Tolovana Hot Springs
are the most important recreational resources in the area. The Tanana
River corridor is a major feature of this region. These values are
protected through multiple use designations and management guidelines.
In addition, as land is disposed of along the Elliott Highway, areas
for access to.the backcountry and to natural features such as dames and
hot springs will be preserved. An area near Hutlinana Hot Springs will
be reserved for recreation a 1 use for trave 11 ers on the Ell i ott Hi ghway
and residents of the Manley and Livengood communities.
5. Fish and Wildlife
The Minto Flats area is of extremely high value as habitat and is
recommended for legislative designation as a Special Wildlife Management
area. Lowlands surrounding Minto Flats, uplands along the northern
ridges bordering the Basin, and the corridors along the Cosna, Chitanana
and Zitziana rivers all require habitat protection but are compatible
with other resource uses.
Severa 1 a reas are-recommended for joint habitat and recrea ti on man-
agement. The re are mini ng ; nterests in the se a reas a 1 so whi ch wi 11 be
accommodated in management guidelines for the subunits.
3·14
-
-
-
-
-
1101'1
'-
-
'~
-1
-
...,.)
-
·-
-
-
"""
-
'-
-
-
"-
-
lt"W'ot
-
~~!
·,_
-
,_.
'""""" -~ =mol<"' ,,Ill ""'~$~~---\
6. Land Sales in the Lower Tanana Subregion
Withi n the Lower Tanana Subregi on a tot a 1 of 4,107 acres of state
land wi 11 be offered for community expansion and recreational subdivi-
sions, 23,950 acres for fee simple homestea.ding and 10,750 acres for
agriculture homesteads and small scale agriculture. Thus, within 15
years, about 38,800 acres will be sold.
a. Land for Community Expansion
The state owns land for community expansion near the communities of
Tofty, Li vengood and Eu reka, but it does not own 1 and th at cou ld be used
for conmunity expansion purposes in Manley or Minto. Due to the small
population in Tofty, Livengood and Eureka, very limited land sales are
recommended in these ar.eas.
Table 3-5.
Land Recommended for Sale for Community Expansion
Project Net Acres
Eureka Community I 100
Eureka Community II 100
Tofty I lOO
Tofty II 100
Tot a 1 --.mo
b. Land for Recreational Use and Self-Sufficient Living.
The state owns large amounts of land between Livengood and Manley
that could be sold for recreational use, but the sale of these areas
would not be particularly popular. The land is not of high quality and
there are few recreational amenities that would draw people to the area.
Consequent ly, on ly a few disposa 1 s are bei ng offered between Li vengood
and Manley.
The state land between Fairbanks and Livengood is more desi reab le
for settlement. These areas are closer ta Fairbanks, and are adjacent to
the Steese White Mountai n Recreation Area. In this area, severa 1 fee
homestead areas and subdivisions will be offered for sale.
3-15
fEXfNAME: Lowerl~nana (R)P: (chapter3) OS
Table 3-6.
land Recommended for Sale for Recreational Subdivisions.
Project
Kentucky Creek (Over-the-Counter)
Deadman Lake (Over-the-Counter)
West ridge I
West ridge II
West ridge III
Tatalina I
Tatalina II
Hut litakwa
Table 3-7.
Net Acres
543
533
100
100
200
100
200
1,400
Total 3,176
Land Recommended for Sale for Recreational Homesteads
Project
Dugan Hills (Over-the-Counter)
Cosna Lower I
Cosna Lower II
West ridge I
West ridge II
Westridge III
Snoshoe Pas s I
Snoshoe Pass II
Snoshoe Pass III
Tata 1 ina
Chi tana na
Globe Cree!<
7. Transportation
Net Acres
7,000
3,000
3,000
1,000
1,000
4,500
500
500
500
500
850
1,000
Tot a 1 23,350
The following access corridors have been identified by the Depart-
ment of Transportation and Public Facilities. There are no proposals for
ac tua 1 const ruet ion of access wi thin the se cor ri dors, but the option to
eventually develop access in these areas should not be precluded.
Elliott and Dalton Highways Realignment: The Alaska Department of
Transportat1on and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) has future plans to recon-
struct and realign much of the Elliott and Dalton Highways. DOT&PF will
work. with the planning team to choose the best routing that meets the
land use objectives described in this report whi le sti 11 complying with
appropriate highway standards and project costs.
3-16
""'"
iloll"
-
-
-
'11<1!1
-
-
-
~
._
....
-
-
-
·-
'-
-
~
-
-
,_
...,;
>-•
'=-~-~~~-~
Western Access Rail raad Corridor: A construction corridor for a
possible ra1lroad extension to the western area of the state has been
identified through this subregion. The corr·idor in this area runs from
Nenana to the vicin1ty of Tanana south of the Tanana River.
Trail s and Revi sed Statu te ! RS) 2477 Roads: Numero us trail s and
minor roads ex1st in th1s subreg1on. See Chapter 2, Public Access and
Trails Management for additional information.
3-17
LMI) œB stMWŒ
WllŒR "mNMA saœx;xœ
(Refer to the maps at the badt of this document)
.----~~œi~ŒS~~.
~CLASSI~
-..,...-·----. ------l
MlNBRAIS 1
~œ··--N!Gft' OF _J
UX':ATABIB LEASEABŒ
MINERAIS MINE1WS
ONr.r/ PRIMAR!! Sl!lXHlAI« StJ:BPAŒ
StJBDNl'.r OSE(S) USE(S) USES
!Gr.r ---tPR:BIBl'l'ED
1----------··-1 Remote cabins 1
A-1 Recreation Land sai~ Closed t Closed '
R:ladS
Improved
pasture
grazing
1------+------------------· High Value Land Sales :
~-!91t. Remote cabins Open i
Agrlc~e ,
1,-.--------------~ A-2
A-3
L:Jw Value i
Res. M;mt. Open Open !
Forestry 1
>--~=~ -----~
B-1 Res. M;mt. Open i
Agrlcûlture i
Habitat 1
-~;; Open Open 1
B-2 Habitat =.,ta, 1 ;:~ 1 ':,---1..w::.1 ... ,.: -=-~ o-3-a:::-::J:
~---·---___ .. _ ___.._
C-1 Habitat
Rel!Dte cabins
Land Sales
L'\'tPtOVed
pasture
grazing
Open Open
------4---------+--l-------
D-1
High Value
Res. M3Jnt.
llqrlcuiture
Minerals
Land Sales
Reloote cabins Open Open
1--------1-------1-------· -----1-------------·
D-2 H~itat
Recreation Remote cabins
Forestry Land Sales
Imp. pasturl!!
grazing
Open Open
1---+-----l----------+--____ _.
1
D-3 -Ett""""t Babitat 1-oabins Closoi Closod to """'
1-------· Remo'7e---;b~"s ------r
B-1 Habitat Forestry Settlement Open Open 1
Recreation Imp. pasture ~
1---t---t-:~-~~ing -·-----·-·· Recreation Remote cabins
E-2 Settlement Habitat Closed Closed i
'----·--'------·-'-------1..---------L.----...,..-. --· ___ _i
3·18
~
~
-
liioi!1
..
•
~
~
\ôi<lii
\~ii!~
--
------------------0-----------~~~-t-twtt;;ltl: A~w-
-
,_
LAR) 1lSB &MfAR!'
IOER 'mNl!NA SOBREGIQI
( Pa fer . to the maps at the back of t:.'lis docume1"1t)
rBŒËïiiï~œ;=r--·--· ---œ---J
PR'JllœED aASSIPICATICIIS --~---
!Gir:r 11--~ PIDnBl'l'BD JGI! Œ' !Gfr OF œt'l'/ PRI:MMr SI!OMlARY iSURFH:E r.oc:ATABLB L&ASFABLE -1 Sœon'r USB{S} 1 USE(S) OSES MINBRl!lS MINElW:S ---------L"11J?X'017ed pas •
E-3 1 Recreation Habitat grazing Closed Closed
(State Reloote cabins ,_
1 1 Rec. Area) Land Sales ---High Value Reloote cabins
Res. M;jmt. Land Sales 1 C{Jen 1 Open -1
1 Agriculture
Habitat
Minerals
ï;bt"t~~~-;;tio-;jnn~ -~.
FQrestry grazing t C{Jen 1 C{Jen
:Reloote cabins
Land Sales ------Land Sales -1 ..,..., ,Habitat 1 Recreation 1 :Reloote cabins C{Jen C{Jen
Grazing -------·--(Special Grazing
H IWildlife Land Sales Closed Open -1 1'43111t. Area} P.oads with
Habitat otility O:>rri crs seasonal
Recreation Material Sales l restrictions
:Reloote cabins
"'-,---c--__ ...... ---·---
r Habitat 1 Recreation 1 Grazinq 1 Open 1 C{Jen 1
1
--.J -· .. ""1-te œbins 1 """'"' la-; ., <Oa!l J-1 1 Settlement 1 Habitat 1
----·---·---1
Grazing 1 1
Recreation Land Sales C{Jen Open 1
'-l-_-b-k, Reloote c~~
J-3 Agrioultore I.p.grazing _.. cab} Clo""
INd Sales -t <0a1
Habitat Grazing ----· --------:
J-4 1 Forestry 1 Recreation 1 Remote cabins Open Open !
! -""~-f:a:~~~i~"' ~ Habltat Focrestry Land Sales C{Jen Open !
----------______ j
High Value 1 Land Sales j
~s ~._M;!mt. :Reloote cabins Open Open 1
Agr1cùlture :
Habitat
3-19
,._
,---
!Of.r
œi'l'/
sœœrr
1---
K-4
K-S
r----
K-6
~------
L-1
L-2
~--
L-3
1-----
L-4
l--·
M-1
~-
M-2
M-3
1----·
M-4
'---
LAm œE SJM\R!l
UJiER 'mNI!RA SI:II3BEGI<::6
(Re fer to the rnaps at the back of this document)
LAm œE œ;~~---i MINERAIS 1
P.l.'lltœED CUISSIPl 1------! --PIDIIBI'l'BD IDft' œ ~ OP
PRIMIUt!' SlOCXJliDi\RY SDBFJ!CE IIJCATABLB LFASFABLB
USE(S) USE(S) USES-MINBlW.S MINERAIS . ·-IDw Value Land Sales
Res. !:!!!!t.
HaEttat Open Open
aecreation Rein:lte cabins
(PrOposed Land Sales Closed Closed
State Rec. Grazing
Area) Leases ---·----,___ ---f-·
Settlement Habitat P.enDte cabins Closed Closed to ooal -----~
L:lW ~Talue Land Sales
Res. Value Re!OOte cabins
iëëreatton
Open Open
l!brestry
Habitat --...... __ ·-Dnproved Land Sales
A;Jriculture pasture Rein:lte cabins Closed Closed tc ooa1
grazing
1---
High Value
Res.~t. Land Sales
11qrt1::ure Re!OOte cabins Open Open
Habitat
Minerals
Habitat Re!oote cabins
Forestry Recreation Land Sales Open Open
Grazing . ------Land Sales
A;Jriculture Imp. paS. Remote Cabins Closed Closed tc ooal
grazing
High Value Re!oote Cabins
Res.~. Land Sales Open Open
A;Jrl~re
Minerals -------1-
Recreat.ion Re!OOte cabins
Eiabitat For estry Land Sales Open Open
Grazing --·-Leases
Recreation Land Sales
Habitat RenDte cabins Closed Open.
Timber Sales
Grapefruit or Permits
Rx:ks-Material Sales
640 acres Trapper cabins
Grazing
3·20
IWI
....
-
lliodi
•
q
~
-
l!ill!l
-
•
iiolliil
~-
,_
r~ r----
!DI'1'
œiT/
SUDO:'Z ~
M-5
""-M-6
"'-M-7
,___ ___ -
N-1
-N-2
~
...., 0
"-
-
~~·
~
-
~ !:lM:\WLO!(L """""""'m """"'·""'"'=--~·-"'~--~-------~--
INI) œB SCIIWtf
UMER 'DilWa SDBRf!IGICII
( Refer to the map~ at the oaclc of this docl.ment)
UIM)tim~::J ----:----------MDIBRAtS
1'1ŒœEiD <USSIPli ---PlŒIBl'1'BD JGtrœ IQft' OP
PRDmR!' Sm:HlAlU' SOBI'1tCZ urATABtB I.I.\'1ISBN!IB
OSB(S) OSB(S) OSBS MINBRALS MDII!:RALS . --:tow Value Land sales
Res.!!!!t·
ââ1htat
Open Open
Mineral&
Rlrestry
Recreation --------· Settlement Habitat ReaDte cabins Closed Closed to ooal
Racreation
---------.. ---·-Habitat ile!~Dte cabins
Forestry Racreation Land Sales Open Open
~
pasture
grazing --·---:tow Value
Res.~
Haëi.tat
Open Open
---Lcw'Value Renv:>te cabins
Res.~t. Land Sales Open Open
}lqrl; ture
Habitat
Mineral&
1 ·---------·-Grazing -~ Land Sales Open
Habitat FIE!nDte œbins
Leases ·---
3-21
Subregion3
Kantishna
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7 . Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
, _______________________________ .,..,. :t:tr:t:::zw aM ""'ffl'-'l!---------L~~ ~~~
-~
-
,_
-
-
'-
-
'•-
-
""""
-
ltXINAM~: cnapterJ lKJ~: l~antlsnna) u~
C. Subregion #3 -Kantishna
This subregion is accessible only by riverboats and airplanes.
Despite its relatively remote location, it receives considerable use by
trappers, hunters and homesteaders.
The management intent for this region is basically an extension of
current uses of the area. There wi 11 be sorne homesteading and large
recreational subdivisions, but the major emphaisis wi 11 be on protecting
the habitat and recreational resources of the area and also maintaining
the option to d~velop the agricultural lands if access and market condi-
tions change. With the exception of the Toklat Springs, the entire sub-
region is open ta mineral entry.
1. Agriculture
Lack of raad access ta this subregion makes agricultural development
unlikely in the near future. State lands with agricultural potential
exi st on the Kant i shna Ri ver and near East Twi n Lake. The re are severa 1
additional areas of cultivable soils scattered throughout the subregion.
At present most of these lands should be given protection through
res ource management and reeva 1 uated as dl eve 1 opme nt becomes morE~
imminent.
There have been no previous sales of small agriculture parcels in
this subregion. Due to the lack of access, the distance from markets and
the high cast of farming in this region, it is not likely to be feasible
to meet the development schedules required on agricultural homesteads and
small scale agriculture parcels. Therefore, none of these are recom-
mended at this time. Meanwhile, lands in this subregion with agricultur-
a 1 pot en ti a 1 wi 11 be p 1 aced in the res ource management category wi th
agriculture a primary value.
2. Forestry
In this subregion, the most productive fQrests have been legisla-
tively designated in the State Forest. However, there is also valuable
timber on the northeast shore of lake Minchumina which is needed for
local use. This area will be held in public o11mership and left open to
timber harvesting.
The large area of good forest land between the Zitziana and the
Kantishna is too remote ta be of use in meeting the overall goals for
forestry. However, this area will be of use as a source of wood products
for local disposals and therefore the area wi 11 be left open to timber
harvesting.
3-22
ltXINAM~: ~napterJ (K)P: lKantlshna) 03
3. Minerals
The principal mineral potential in this subregion occurs near the
Bitzshtini, Chitanatala and Chitsia Mountains. Active mineral claims are
located in the Bitzshtini Mountains, Clear Creek and Cosna River areas.
No coal bearing units or basins with potential hydrocarbon formations are
known within the Kantishna Subregion. The state land in the area will
generally be left open ta mineral entry, coal prospecting and leasing,
..
-
oil and gas leasing, and industrial leasing for mill sites. llill1l
4. Recreation
Recreational opportunities in this subregion are of law ta moderate
value overall due ta the limited accessibility of the area. Recreational
use is concentrated on rivers, including the Kantishna and Teklanika and
around lakes, including Lake Minchumina and sorne of the smaller lakes
west of the Kantishna River. For residents of the region, winter trails
are of high recreational value.
Areas around disposals and along navigable rivers will be protected
by buffers. The Twin Lakes and portions of Wien Lake away from the
waterfront are recommended for private recreation.
5. Fish and Wildlife
The area near the junction of the Sushana and the Toklat Rivers is
extremely important habitat requiring protection and recommended for
legislative designation as "Critical Habitat." Waterfowl habitats south
of Lake Minchumina and the habitat area south of the Bearpaw disposal are
designated primary use habitat.
The balance of the lands surrounding Lake Minchumina and along the
Kantishna, Toklat and Teklanika River drainages and the headwaters of the
Cos na and the Zi tzi ana Ri vers wi 11 be ret ai ned in pub 1 i c ownershi p and
managed primarily for multiple use, including habitat.
6. Land Sales in the Kantishna Subregion
a. Introduction
In the Kant i shna Regi on, a tata 1 of 1,844 acres of state land are
recommended ta be sold for subdivisions and 31,200 acres for fee simple
homesteading. Because the region is not accessible, no agricultural
disposals are recommended at this time.
b. Land for Community Expansion
The only community in the Kantishna Subregion is Lake Minchumina.
Parcels of land in this area are used for bath recreation and year-round
residential use. Further land sales in the vicinity of Lake Minchumina
are therefore discussed in the section on land for recreational use.
3-23
---
u
-
--
~
11!\!iiJ
-
w;ili
--
'-
-
-
,_
-
,_
~
·-
,_
'-
,_
'"""'""-=:::a-.a "5""'"""'*'"""~~----L---""~~~~
c. Recreational Land and Land for Self-Sufficient Living
Of the total acres offered in the past four years for recreational
subdivisions in this unit, approximately 40% have sold, but only 7% of
the remote parcel offerings have sold. The state owns most of the land
in this region, however the vast majority of it is inaccessible and of
very poor quality. Popular land sale areas lie on fly-in lakes and along
the navigable portions of the rivers of the r·egion. Most of the lakes
and a few of the rivers already have land sales on them. The remaining
lakes and sorne of the remaining riverfront property are recommended for
sale.
Table 3-9.
Land Recommended for Sale for
Recreational Subdivisions
Project
Geskamina Lake (Over-the-Counter)
Iksgiza Lake (Over-the-Counter)
Kindamina Lake (Over-the-Counter)
West Twin Lake (Over-the-Counter)
Wein Lake I
Wein Lake II
Wei n Lake III
Wein Lake IV
Snohomish Lake I
Snohomish Lake II
Snohomish Lake III
Lake Mi nch umi na
3-24
Tata 1
Net Acres
205
227
193
100
119
75
75
450
50
50
200
100
1,844
TEXTNAME: Chapter3 (R)P: (Kantishna) 05
Table 3-10
land Recommended for Sale for
for Fee Homesteads
Project
Cannon (Over-the-Counter)
Kantishna (Over-the-Counter)
Snoshoe (Over-the-Counter)
Zitziana (Over-the-Counter)
Bearpaw
Wei n Lake I
Wein Lake II
Wei n Lake III
Wein Lake IV
Mucha Lake I
Mucha lake II
Geskakmina I
Geskakmina II
Snohomi sh Lake
Cosna Upper
Kindamina
Lake Minchumina
Net Acres
1,700
6,000
1,600
2,500
2,500
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,500
750
750
1,000
6,000
1,500
400
Total 31,200
.,J
---
---
~
If all of the above projects were offered, there would be approxi-iil!il
mately 1,644 acres of subdivision land and 31,200 acres of fee simple
homesteading land avai lable over the next twenty years.
In addition to state land available for sale it is likely that a
portion of the 2,700 acres the state has sold in the past four years will
be avai lable on the private land market within the next few years.
Native corporations also own land in the region, sorne of which is likely
to be available.
Thus, there is a minimum of over 30,000 acres of land available to
meet people's desire for land in this region over the next twenty years.
This is more than double the maximum projected need for this type of land
for the entire Basin to the year 2000. This abundant supply should allow
for investment and provide buyers with a large degree of choice.
7. Transportation
The following access corridors have been identified by the Depart-
ment of Transportation and Public Facilities. There are no proposals for
actual construction of access within these corridors, but the option to
-
~
eventually develop access in these areas should not be precluded. -
-
3-25 -
""'•
'-
-
-
,_
-
,_,
·-
·-
._
·--·-~-·----------
Western Access Rai 1 raad Corri dar: A corridor for construction of a
possible rai lroad extension ta the western a~rea of the State has been
identified through this subregion. The corridor in this area, runs from
Nenana to the vicinity of Tanana south of the Tanana River.
Nenana -Kantishna -McGrath Highway Corridor: A corridor for con-
struction of a possible highway to Kantishna and McGrath has been identi-
fied in this subregion. The main concern is the connection to the
Kantishna area. The route runs west from the Parks Hi ghway at Ferry,
th en southwester ly toward Kant i shna. This i s an a 1 te rna te route to the
Lignite-Kantishna proposal which utilizes portions of Stampede Raad.
Lignite -Kantishna Highway Corridor: This corridor would connect
Kantishna to the Parks Hlghway near Llgnite (Healy) and would utilize
parti ons of Stampede Raad. This route was ana lyzed by the Interi or
Alaska Transportation Study and i s an a lternat'ive to the east end of the
Nenana-Kantishna-McGrath route.
Nenana -Totchaket Area Access: With the development of the Nenana-
Totchaket Agriculture Project, access routes for roads and/or rai lroad
spurs have been identified and these rights-of-way shall be protected.
Additionally, this route could be extended to the Kantishna River to
provide access to any future forestry area.
Trails and Revised Statute RS Numerous trai ls and
minor roa s exist 1n th1s subreg1on. See hapter 2, Public Access and
Trails Management for additional information.
3-26
LAtm œB SlH4ARl'
KARriSBHA SJBEIFliiCN
{ Refer to the map; at the baclt of this doetm~ent}
r--·-1 LAtmtR~~---··-~----~-------
HINElW.S
p.li:)EIŒE[) a-'SSin ------__ _j
K01Il PHBIBI'ŒD fGrr OP
UNrr/ l'Ril4AR!l Sl!XXHlARlC SUBPAΠu:x:ATABLE L
stiBIJŒr USE(S) USE(S) USI!S lllNERAIS -r--·----'--·----·-..=_~ ...._
Grazing
A-1 Habitat Eerote cabins
Recreation Land Sales
--Habitat Eerote cabins
A-2 Settlement Recreation ------~---1-·----·---Grazing
A-3 Habitat Renk)te cabins
Land Sales -· -----Recreation Land Sales
B-1 Habitat EOrestry Material Sales
& (Critical) Grazing
B-2 ~
Utility
corridors
EBrote cabins
r--·
Porestry
C-1 Settlement Habitat Re!rote cabins ----Habitat Recreation EBrote cabins
C-2 Porestry Land Sales
Grazing -·----Land Sales
D Habitat Grazing
------~-Settlement Renk)te cabins
E-1
1------·-1--·
I.ow Value Retoote cabins
E-2 ~-JlÇllt.
Recreation
Habitat
-------·· -1--·------Recreation Foads
E-3 Habitat Utility Corrid
Eerote cabins
Leases
Grazing --------High Value Land Sales
E-4 Res. JlÇllt. Eerote cabins
.Agnëûitur'e
Habitat r-----!"-"----------·---
F-1 Habitat Settlement Grazing --·----~--
3-27
Open
Closed
-
Open
--
Open
to
leasehold
location
Closed
Open
---···
Open
--Closed
----Open
-----
rs
Closed
. __ j
Cl
---
Open
----·--
Open
--
Closed to -
Open
-
Open
---Closed to
---'-----Open
Closed
Coalj
1 _ _J
ooal
1
1
coal
---1-------
Open Open
1--
Open Open -----
Vil
--
·-
-
"""
--
--
' ' ' -
!mi
..
Wi
,.
-·-um i4!0tLe W"""'m "'>>!lllôi!I!O:Œ ·-"'" """~"' ~l!'l:.'ll!:l"WW ==--·~-......-..-L·~-•-.-<lo-~~~
"-
-
_,
-
\-
.....
""""'
'-
\~
LIH) œE SI:MtARY
KANriSBNA SJBRmiCN
( Fefer to the maps at the bacl<: of this docunent)
-· LAR) œE œiÏQàTÏ~-----~M:ôiiiiWB--l
PRJPœED CIASSIFICATl -----·----
!l2r --PIOIIBI'l'BD *'Ml' ar !DtT OP
UNI'r/ PIUMiœY S~ SURPl!CE UlCATAULB LF.ASP.ABIE
-· ---· -----F-2 High Value Re!rote cabins
sœœr.r OSE(S) USE(S) USES MINIDW:S MINERAI:.s 1
Res. M:!mt. Land Sales Cpen Cpen 1
llgrJ.ëiliture
Minerals
Habitat ---r------
High Value Relrote cabins
G-1 Res.~ Land Sales Cpen Cpen
iijrfc ture
Habitat
Minerals ·-r------1------·---
Land Sales
Imp. pas. Cpen Cpen
G-2 Habitat grazing --1--·---1--
li-1 Settlement Habitat Remote cabins Closed Closed to ooal
1-------
P.etoote cabins
B-2 Habitat Land Sales Cpen Cpen
I. p. graz:ing
High Value
H-3 Fes. M:!mt. Land Sales
Cpen 1 agrJ.ëûlture Rerrote cabins Cpen
habitat
minerals ! ---· ---r----------.
P.etoote cabins 1
I-1 Habitat Land Sales Open Cpen
Imp. pas.
grazing --------
I-2 Settlement Habitat Relrote cab:ins Closed. Closed to ooa1
Fecreation
!"'------r-------!--· --·-High Value Land Sales
I-3 Fes. M;!mt.
llgricultuie
Femote cabins Cpen Open
Habitat
Minerals
r-----r--·-·-1----··--------·---::r Recreation Land Sales
J-1 F::>restry Habitat Imp. pas. Cpen
grazing
--------
J-2 Settlement Forestry Remote cabins Closed Closed to coal
1--------r---· --------Efigh Value Land Sales
J-3 Res. M:!mt. Remote cabins Cpen Cpen
PJ;riculture
Forestry
Minerals
----~---......... _____ .___ ____ --·---
3·28
~---
~Url'
œl'.r/
StBlNI'i" -· J-4
K-1
K-2
r----·--
L-1
----
L-2
r---·-·-
M-1
r----
M-2
r-----
N-1
-·--
N-2
r----
0
r-----P-1 --
P-2
LliR) œB Sl:IM\R!'
IWlfiSHNA SOBH!mCR
( Refer to the maps at the back of this document)
LliR) œB IiSÏQVd'I::r. ·-···-·---···~-·-HINBRALS
PRll'ŒBD aASSIPI -------PlDIIBI'l'BD tGfl' œ ~Url' OF
PRIMARr SBCCIID!\RY SllW!CE ~:ΠLEASFABLE
USB(S} USE(S) USES MINERAIS MINERM.S ----------~·-·-·-Recreation Habitat Land Sales Closed Closed
Remote Cabins ------r---
Habitat Grazing Open Open
--
Settlement Habitat Re!rote Cabins Closed Closed to coa1
1------·--... -.. _
RenPte cabins
Habitat tand Sales Open Open
Grazing --·-----------------1-·---·-----
Settlment Habitat Ren'Ote cabins Closed Closed to coal ,__. -.. -----·--------High Value
Res.~ Remote cabins --Land Sales Open Open A;rl. ture
Minerals -··-·--------·-·-tow Value
Res. M3mt. Land Sales Cp:!n Open
'HabJ.tat -
Minerals -----· __ . ___ ......._ ______ --·----·-1 Airstrips
Habitat Recreation New Ebads Open Open 1 Grazing
Otility Cbrrid rs 1 Trapping Cabins ~-~-~ Remote cabins
Land Sales
Leases
----·-liigh Value Land Sales
Res. M:jmt. Remote cabins Open
Jqriëûltuie
Habitat 1 ,___··-··--,__ .. --.. -r------·-1------·-. ·i Timber harvest fn9
Habitat Material Sales
(Critical} Grazing
Closed 1 Fbads Closed
Trapper cabins
Leases
Remote cabins
Land Sales ----·--·--1----·----1
Habitat Grazing Open Open
1"-·~-----r--·----·-·-liigh Value Land Sales
Res. M:3mt. Remote cabins Open Open
1\.;riëûl ture
Habitat
Minerals
L------~--'--·----------· ------·-
3-29
-..
....
-
~
..
-
-
IOiJI'I
--
IOiJI'I
loilil!l
-
....,
-
~!..il
-
--! 1 t! -!ll'l~!M Ol"lg -lW t!i( --IU>!L -~,____L,
"""'
"""'
-
:.,..
-
._,
"-'
-
-
'-
-
"-'
-
-
-
--
._
INO œE lDMAR'!
KMriS8NA SJBRmiQI
(Refer to the maps at the back of this docurumt)
r--· LlH) ·9 œsiGNAT.Ioo-:r--
PJ.ŒIC&D CI:ASSIFI~ëul;
JGr.r
II«T/
StJDill'f
i PKBIBI'l'ED = ~~s~~
---~ 1~
lœ-ât~oF-
WCATAB'Œ LEASEABŒ
MINBRAL'S MINBRi\LS
1-<--· -+--
Land Sales
Q-t Habitat Recreation j ~.:. p grazing
1---·-+-----+-Fo-r_es_t_ry ~te cabins 1 ~-L-~-..
RenDte cabins
Land Sales Q-2 Forestry Open Open
I. p. grazing Habitat icreation
G !: .:::-Settl-t 1. P.'9~az~ ~-~~--
Q-3 Hab1.tat Forestry Open Open
1---+---------
R Habitat Cpen Open
RenDte cabins
Land Sales
Recreation ~razing
'----___ _._ ___ -~..... ___ _
3-30
Subregion4
Parks Highway
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3 . Kantishna
4 . Parks
5 . Alaska Range West
6 . Alaska Range East
7 . Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9 . Delta-Salcha Area Plan
'""'
'~
'-
"-
·-
·-
"-
·-
-
-
-
'-~n~ Mi!<±Lrl; '"'""=~
TEXTNAME: Parks (R)P: (chapter3) 02
O. Subregion #4 -Parks Highway
This is one of the most accessible subre!gions in the Basin. The
Parks Highway unit is bisected by the highway and the railroad and there
are numerous trail s, roads and ri vers which extend i nto the backcountry.
Commercial guiding, hunting, trapping, r1ecreation and coal mining
are the major land uses in the area along with sorne grazing. Settlements
extend along the highway throughout the unit. This area has been the
location of several state disposals over the !J~St four years.
The management intent for this heavily used region is to sell sorne
1 and in the Anderson and Healy are as, ret ain sorne 1 and for local wood
products, pl ace agricul tural sail s in a re source management category,
leave the high value mineral land open to mine!ral entry and protect the
habitat and recreational resources of the area.
1. Agriculture
This subregion contains several areas of accessible agricultural
lands along the Nenana River/Parks Highway corridor. This land will be
sold for small-scale agriculture. In the past four years, 100% of the
acreage offered under this program (4876 acre!s) has been sold in the
Parks Highway Subregion. It is assumed that future sales will be
equally popul ar.
Since 147,000 acres are recommended for sale for commercial agricul-·
ture in the Nenana-Totchaket area, no additional large-scale projects are
recommended for this subregion. Most of the accessible agriculture soils
in this region will be offered for small-scale agriculture or agriculture
homes te ad i ng.
Project
Kobe I
Kobe II
Kobe III
Kobe IV
Kobe V
Kobe VI
Windy I
Wi nd y II
Julius Creek
Chump
Table
land Recommended for AgricultllJral Sale
3-31
Net Acres
1,500
1,830
750
750
750
750
750
5,050
1,000
1,000
Total 14,130
TEXTNAME: Parks (R)P: (chapter3) 03
Areas of agricultural land also exist in more remote areas along the
Teklanika, Toklat and Sushana Rivers. With the exception of the critical
habitat along the Toklat and the proposed settlements along the
Teklanika, these areas will be protected by resource management and
reevaluated for possible sale as the Nenana-Totchaket region develops.
2. Forestry
!ii!!!'i
-
~
....
The Tan ana Valley State Forest shoul d meet the demand for wood ~
products for Nenana. However, Anderson and Healy are located too far
from the State Forest and therefore these areas need to have sorne nearby
land in public ownership which is open to timber harvesting. The state
land along Seventeen-Mile Slough north of Anderson could serve that
community's woodcutting needs and the area east of Lignite (see Forestry
Element Map) will be a source of wood products for Healy. Bath areas
will be retained in public ownership and open to timber harvesting for II!OIÎ
bath commercial and personal use.
3. Minerals
The area east of Healy is one of the most active mineral exploration
and production areas in the state. Most of the activity occurs to the
lloilli
east, but protection of mining activity in this subregion and access to ~
the backcountry are important management objectives.
In the area extending east of Ferry, subsurface development will be
a primary management objective. In general, most confl icts wi th the
recreation and wildlife values in this area can be resolved through
management guidelines.
4. Recreation
River valleys, historical trails, and alpine country which is acces-
sible ta Fairbanks and local communities are significant recreational
resources in this area.
Trails, historie sites and access sites along the Parks Highway
corridor will be protected by recreational designation. Kobe Summit and
Slate Creek will be designated recreation sites with trails leading from
the highway. Access sites along the Parks Highway and the Nenana River
will be protected by"recreation designation. Important recreation values
in Reindeer Hills, Walker Oome, and Rex Dame will be protected. Open
space close ta communities will be retained for multiple use including
recreation.
5. Fish and Wildlife
The Parks Highway subregion contains sever al areas of high value
habitat. Near the highway and in accessible mountain valleys, human use
of wildlife can be intensive. In this subregion, habitat is one of
several designated uses on many retained lands. There is an area for
caribou calving near the end of the Stampede Trail. This area will be
protected through designation as habitat ~ and through management
guidel ines.
3-32
-
...,;
.....
....
-
'>l'ill
-
,,
,,
-------------------------------------,~--'
-
"""'
,,,_,
-
""""
L~
._
,_
-
-
'-
._
TEXTNAME: Parks (R)P: (chapter3) 04
6. Possible Land Exchanges
Township 11 South, Ranges 9, 10 and 11 West, which are located along
the Stampede Trail, should be considered for a land exchange. This area
was included as past of the original Denal"i National Park extension
proposal.
The primary resource values are recreation and habitat, with sorne
coal. The area is an important caribou calving region. These townships
and adjoining lands are designated for recreation and habitat management,
and park service management will be compatible with this intent.
7. Settlement
In the Parks Highway Subregion, a total of' 6,660 net acres of subdi-
visions, 22,040 acres of fee simple homesteads and 14,130 acres of small
agriculture parcel s and agricul tural homesteads are recommended for sale.
a. Land for Community Expansion
There are 5 communities in this region. Land sales are recommended
in the vicinity of Nenana, Healy, McKinley Village and Anderson to meet
the commun i ty expansion needs of tho se commun i ti es. The po pu 1 at ion of
this area is expected to increase by 1900 people by the year 2000, and
the land needs of this new population are estimated to be between 575 and
2 ,300 acres .
In the Nenana area, land for community expansion is in bath native
and state ownership. Several areas of state land will be offered in the
vicinity of Nenana. The amount of 1 and offered will greatly exceed
projected land conversion needs of the Nenana area, even if the Nenana-
Totchaket area is developed.
In the Anderson area, people want morE! land sales immediately
adjacent to the town. To meet this need, several areas have been identi-·
fied for sale. These sales would allow for a wide degree of consumer
choice and provide abundant land in the Anderson area.
In Healy, the same situation exists. Although the state has sold
large acreages of land in the vicinity of Heatly, more land is wanted.
The new areas identified for sale in the Healy area, along with the land
that was sold in the past should more than adequately meet resident's
needs, even if the coal operations in Healy greatly expand.
In McKinley Village, the limited amount of state
used for community expansion is recommended for sale.
the are as th at were proposed for a 1 and trade wi th
Service .
3-33
land th at coul d be
This land includes
the National Park
1 C.AII~I-\I'IC.: l"'at'K::t ~K)I"': ~CIId[.lC~r..:>J U::J
Table 3-11
Oisposals Recommended for
Community Expansion
Project
Nenana
Berg
Farmview (over the counter)
Nenana South (over the counter)
Whoopie I
Whoopi e II
Whoopie III
Nenana North
Anderson
Anderson New I
Anderson New II
Healy
Otto Lake I
Otto Lake II
Otto Lake III
McKinley Village
V i 11 age Vi ew
Land Swap
Village View Ext.
Total
Net Acres
329
349
147
lOO
lOO
250
300
200
800
75
75
150
200
300
100
3,518
b. Recreational Land and Land for Self Sufficent Living.
Past 1 and sales in the Parks Hi ghway region for this type of use
have not sold parti cul arly well: 20% of past subdivisions and 27% of
..
..
lio!i>l
"'""
.,;
•
lrm!i!
..
"""'
......
.....
remotes were taken. The state has already offered for sale the majority ~
of accessible state owned land in the region and there are 3,681 acres
of subdivision and 9,840 acres of homestead left in past sale areas along
the Parks Highway that will continue to be offered for sale. In addition
to these past sale areas the majority of the remaining accessible land
along the Parks Highway will be sold.
"""'
-
""""
3·34
'"""
''*"'
'-
'~
~
"-
,_
"""
"""'
'""''"'''"''"'"l&""'Wll"'""'''._,"""""'..._,...,......,_,.. """"'""' -~-~~--~
TEXTNAME: Parks (R)P: (chapter3) 06
Table 3-12
Oisposals RecoiiiRended for
Recreational Use
Project
I. Subdivisions
Panguingue (over the counter)
Anderson (over the counter)
June Creek (over the counter)
II. Fee Homesteads
Bear Creek (over the counter)
Slate Creek (over the counter)
Windy Creek (over the counter)
Healy
Teklanika I
Tekl ani ka II
Teklanika III
Tekl anik a IV
Ridge Rock
Clear Sky
Anderson New I
Lignite
Anderson New II
Southwind I
Montana Creek
Total
Net Acres
827
1,200
1,115
3,142
400
1,000
4,000
4,840
500
250
250
1,000
400
5,000
500
1,000
1,500
1,000
400
Total -22,040
8. Transportation
The following access corridors have been identified by the Oepart-
ment.of Transportation and Public Facilities (OOT/PF). There are no
proposals for actual construction of access within these corridors at
this time, but the option ta eventually develop access in these areas
should not be precluded.
Nenana -Kantishna -McGrath Highway Corridor: A corridor for
construction of a possible highway ta Kantishna and McGrath has been
identifed in this subregion. The main concern is the connection ta the
Kantishna area. The route runs west from th4~ Parks Highway at Ferry,
then southwesterly toward Kantishna. This is an alternate route to the
L ignite-Kantishna propos al which ut il ized portions of Stampede Raad.
Lignite -Kantishna Highway Corridor: This corridor would connect
Kantishna to the Parks Highway near Lignite (Healy) and would utilize
portions of Stampede Raad. This route was analyzed by the Interior
Alaska Transportation. Study and is an alternative to the east end of the
Nenana-Kantishna-McGrath route.
3-35
Nenana -Totchaket Area Access: With the development of the
Nenana-Totchaket Agriculture Project, access routes for roads and/or
rail raad spurs have been identified and these rights-of-way shall be
protected. Additionally, an extension south could form a loop ta the
Parks Highway at Rex which would provide access ta previous State land
disposals.
Upper Wood River (Bonnifield Mining District) Access: Any mineral
development in this area would require raad access. A corridor has
been identified through this subregion that extends from the Parks
Highway at Ferry, easterly along the foothills of the Alaska Range.
-
Anderson Northeastern Access Raad: The City of Anderson has ~
requested additiona1 access from the Parks Highway. A corridor has been
proposed from the city, east-northeasterly to the Parks Highway in the
southern portion of Township 6 South, Range 8 West, Fairbanks Meridian.
The raad would be either a winter road or a year-round road depending
upon needs.
Parks Highway Improvements: DOT/PF is examining possible future ...,
improvements to the Parks Highway. Additional lanes, climbing lanes and
shoulder widening are sorne of the improvements proposed.
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline: One of the alternative routes for the
gas pipeline would follow the Parks Highway -Alaska Railroad corridor
from Fairbanks to Cook Inlet.
Trails and Revised Statute (RS) 2477 Roads: Numerous trails and
minor roads exist in this subregion. See Chapter 2, Public Access and
Trails Management for additional information.
3·36
.._
....,
-
-
-
-
-
-
""""
---
,_
"-"
-
"""'
-
"'""'
_,<.,,...;Ma::a4ll4l<$;JJ)t>-----~~-~
f..AR) ŒlB stiM\tŒ
PARIS lfiGBWAY sœRJ!liiQt
( Refer to the maps at the back of this docUIIIEnt l
r---·--1 rRi)tiB"œsiGNATiœs:r---· ·----!
PIIJPOSBO a.ASSIFICATIQt --
IIINERAIS
IQ1'1' ......__
tmT/ PRIIWŒ
SlJlDti'.r OSE{S) ·-1-----·-
A Habitat
--
B:abitat
B Recreation
1-----·
C-1 Settlement
-·-·--·--··
Habitat
C-2 Recreation
-·-·----·-
D-1 B:abitat
--·
D-2 Settlement
-· Recreation
D-3 Habitat
(Prop. St.
Re<:. River) -----Recreation
Habitat
E -----
F-1 Settlement
-·-------Habitat
F-2 Recreation
!-----.
' F-3 Agriculture
~--·-----------
-~---P!UIIBI'l'BD
SEO.HlAR!' stmFJ!CE
tJSE(S) USES
!--·---!--·-·-·---Re!rote cabins
-Land Sales
-Grazing
-Re!rote cabins
-Land Sales
-Grazing.
-·-Habitat -Re!rote cabins
Recreation
-Re!rote Cabins
Forestry -Land Sales
-Grazing
-Eiei!Dte cabins
Recreation -Land Sales
For estry -Improved
pasture
grazing
Recreation -Re!rote cabins
R>restry
Habitat
-Leases
-Land Sales
-Relll:>te Cabins
-Grazing ....... ---Eiei!Dte cabins
-Land Sales
-Grazing
--Habitat
R>restry -Re!rote Cabins
Recreation
·-1---
-Re!oclte cabins
Forestry -Land Sales
-Improved
pasture
grazing
--------Habitat -~te cabins
Recreation -Land Sales
For estry
Improved
pasture gr. ---
3-37
!Gfrœ
IDCATABI
MlHBRAil: 1-----
Open
~
!-----Closed
----
~
~---~--
Open
Closed
prior to
sale
-
Closed
-
Open
--
Closed
!Gof.r OF
E 1 LFASF.PIBLE
MDlERALS
Open
~
Open
---------1
Closed to
coal prior to
sale
Open
----·
Open
_1
Closed to coal
-+---------
Open Open
-·--·-·
Closed Closed to ooal
----·--!... • ··----
LAtll USE SIHfARr
PARIS HIGaiii.Y SOBRilXaON
( .Refer to the maps at the back of this doc1.111ent l
r---,.--[LliHlœEŒSI~~ ---~-~----;
PHJllœED crASSIPI • --
!GI'.r -P!ŒIBr.L'l!D ~ Œ' !Dfr OF
UNIT/ PlllJoW« SECDlDAR!' SUBPJICB I#XATABIB LEASFABLB
aamT rOSE(~~ USiS MlHERAIS 1 MlNBMIB
~ --+--------~------~----------~
G-1
High Value
Resource
Management
A;nculture
111:lrestry
Habitat
-Rellote cabins
-Land Sales 1 Open Cpm
1
--Forestey !-Land Sales ---·----~1
-Improved Cpm Cpm
~t~ 1
G-2 1 Habitat
1---gra~ing _____ _j
Habitat -Rem:>te cabins Closed Closed to ooall
.Recreation 1
~~-f:e:tlement Fore~:r:'_ ..______ --··•
Iow Value -Pemote cabins 1
H-2 Res. Mgmt. -t.and Sales Open Cpm j'
hâbitat
~-1 -------
H-3 =·v~:. -Land Sales 1
agne cure -Rem:>te Cabins Cpm Cpm 1
habitat
mm mg
f~:stry
1 ~ ----·---· 1 Habitat .
Forestry -Rem:>te cabins Closed Closed to c:oall
I-1 -Ettleœnt l""""t!Dn i 1----·------·----· ......1 -Land Sales 1
I-2 Habitat -Improved Cp!n Cpan
~ture
grazing
1---1 1 1 -+-------J-1 Habitat -Rellote cabins
Recreation -Land Sales
Forestry -Improved
Cpm Open
~t~
1---! . ~Habit-at :~ ------. ---1
J-2 Settle.1lleilt Forestry Closed Closed to c:oalj
1----+-----~:J.on ------____ j
Habitat -Pemote cabins Closed to c:oall
Forestry -Land Sales Closed pdo prior to
Agriculture .Recreation to sale sale i
Grazing ,
1--------· -----~
High Value -Re!oote cabins _, J-4 Res. Mgm.t. -Land Sales epan epan
AgrJ.ëûlt~
Forestry
Habitat
1-....--------
J-3
3-38
"ti'
f,WI
..-
Ol<llil
""""
""""
-
-
--------------------------------~-----------------l.o·--~~~~.1
-
-
-
....
,_
'-'
LAm OSE &M4ARX'
PARIS BIGEMAY SOBRI!GIQi
( Pefer to the maps at the back of this dOCI.I11ent l
r----Trât>~ ŒSIQiA'I'I~J ----.....-----------,
Mili!ŒALS 1
PIIJI.'I:E2D CLl\SSII!'ICAXl -~ IO!T --PJDIIBrl'BD IO!T Cl'' IO!T 01!'
ONI'l'/ p~ SI!XlHlAl« Stm!'JlCE UJCATABŒ LEASlWliB
sœœr:r tlSE(S) USE(S) OSFS MIHERALS MINERMS -----·. ---f--·
K-1 ReereatJ.On settlement RenDte cabins 1 !
· Forestry Improlred cp!n Open
pasture
1
grazing ---·-1-·-------j Forestry Rerote cabins Closed Closed to coalJ
K-2 settlement Reereation
1 -· -Re!rote cabins
L Habitat -Land Sales Open Open
"Recreation -Improlred
pasture
grazing
1---------Renote cabins
-Land Sales Open Open
M Habitat Reereation -Grazing
---·-------
3-39
Subregion 5
West Alaska Range
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2 . Lower Tanana
3 . Kantishna
4 . Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8 . Goodpaster
9 . Delta-Salcha Area Plan
om~--~~~~------=-------~--------~~~~---------------------=-~~~-=~-----==-=-=-=~~--~œ~œœ~~~--~~-----~~~~
....
-
-
"'--
(,"""""'
-
--
ltXINi-\.1'11:.: WaKrange (t<)P: \Cild[H.erjJ u.:
E. SUbregion #5 -West Alaska Range
This area includes the largely mountainous region from Healy east to
the Little Delta River and from the Fairbanks North Star Borough south to
the Denali Highway. The region is not readi ly accessible, but there are
severa 1 tra i 1 s in the a rea. Most of the subreÇ~i on i s owned by the State
of Alaska.
Commercial guiding, hunting, trapping, and mining are the major land
uses in the area.
The management intent for this subregion is to encourage mineral
development while protecting the wildlife habitat values to the maximum
extent possible.
1. Agriculture
There are no potential agricultural values due to the high eleva-
tions in mountainous portions and swampy conditions of the lowlands in
this subregion.
2. Forestry
Forest values in the subregion are very lov1.
3. Minerals
The area east of Healy is one of the most active mineral exploration
and production areas in the state. There ar~~ large blocks of active
claims and the entire area has very high potential for coal, gold, and
other minerals.
In the area extending east of Ferry to thie Little Delta River and
south to Anderson Mount ain, mi nera 1 deve lopment is a primary management
objective. This area will be left open to mineral entry, coal prospect-
ing, and oil and gas and coal leasing. In general, conflicts with the
recreation and wildlife values in this area can be resolved through
management guidelines. However, there are several peregrine falcon
nests, mineral licks, and a caribou calving a1rea which require certain
restrictions to protect the habitat. These restrictions are specified in
the management guidelines following this discussion.
4. Recreation
Despite its relatively remote location, this subregion supports a
moderate level of recreational use for climbing, hiking, and camping.
In addition, all retained lands in the subreqion will be managed for
multiple use including recreation.
S. Fish & Wildlife
This subregion includes considerable high value habitat and several
biologically critical habitats.
3-40
Habitat is a primary use in the entire subregion and protection of
the habitat values is the principal management objective in the critical
habitat areas. The rest of the area will be managed for multiple use,
including mining. Conflicts between these uses wi 11 be resolved to the
greatest extent possible through the management guidelines specified in
each unit and through the standard permit procedures.
6. Settlement
There are two areas designated for settlement in this subregion.
650 acres wi 11 be offered for sa 1 e wi thin the ex i st i ng Wood River and
Gold King disposal projects.
7. Transportation
The following access corridors have been identified by the Depart-
ment of Transportation and Public Facilities. There are no proposals for
actual construction of access within these corridors, but the option to
eventually develop access should not be precluded.
Upper Wood River Bonnifield Mining District Access: Any mineral
development 1n th1s area wou d require raad access. A corridor has been
identified through this subregion from the Parks Highway at Ferry,
-
-
easterly along the foothills of the Alaska Range. ~
Trai 1 s and Revi sed Statute
mi nor roads ex 1 st 1 n th 1 s subreg ion. See C
Trails Management for additional information.
3-41
Numerous trails and
2, Public Access and ..
-
-
...,;,
-
-
-------------~----------------~-------------
tAti) œB SlRtMr
NBST AlASKA lWGE &JB~U:X;IŒ
( aefer to the maps at the back of this document)
,--··cr.Mii·œs-œs~---------,-------;liËRMS---=
PRPœED a..ASSIPI f----··· --
-
Kilft PKBIBl'l'ED Kilft œ tG4T OP
tlfi'l'/ PRDIARr sa:x:tmARY SURP'N:B WCATABtB I.2ASFABŒ ·
sœœ:rr OSB(S) OSB(S) USES MINBRALS: MINERALS -~ ~-------:erote cabins 1
-
A Habitat aecreation -Land Sales Open Open ~ -Grazing
i------~---:erote cabins
-Land Sales Open. Open 1
-
B Habitat Recreation -Grazing
' ------1----:erote cabins -, -
-Land Sales Open Open
C-1 Habitat Recreation -Grazing
J 1----------------1---
-Fie!!Dte cabins Open 1 C-2 Habitat -Land Sales 'lhrough Open
-Grazing Leaseholdi
ü:x:ation
1
1------------1-------1--~ Habitat :Renx:lte cabins '
-
D-1 Settlenent Recreation Closed =~dWl l'.mptolred
pas. grazing
on remaining
public lands
1-------·-1-----1------------~ -:erote cabins
1 -r..aoo Sales Open Open 1
D-2 Habitat -I.P. Grazing
1 -----------1------------
---:erote cabins 1
E Habitat -Land Sales Open Open !
-I.P. Grazing ! _______ ...__ ____ --·-
'-
3-42
Subregion6
East Alaska Range
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
-
""""'
~""-~""=-.,..-------~~~~1
TEXfNAME: EaKrange (R)P: (cnapter3) 02
F. Subregion 16 -East Alaska Range
The East Al as ka Range subregi on i s a mountai nous a rea in the south-
central portion of the Basin. Access to the area is via the Richardson
Highway running north-south through the region and the Denali Highway
running east-west.
Commercial guiding for big game, trapping, hunting and recreation
are the principal land uses in this area. Sorne mining occurs in the
northern part of the unit. Settlement in the unit is confined to areas
very close to the road.
Future uses in this subregion are for the most part an extension of
existing uses, i.e., recreation, fish and wildlife use and mineral
extraction.
1. Agriculture
There are no known agricultural areas in this subregion.
2. Forestry
This area is located at tao high an elevation to be a productive
forest area. Consequently, no land has been designated for forestry.
3. Minerals
This area has several scattered blacks of active claims north of
Wil dhorse Creek. The sub regi on wi 11 be 1 eft open to mi nera 1 ent ry, co a 1
prospecting and oil and gas and coal leasing.
4. Recreation
This subregion contains the second highest peaks of the Alaska Range
and extensive glaciers and rivers. Central fe!atures include Summit and
Fielding Lakes and the surrounding high country, and the Delta River with
its boating opportunities. Access provided by the Oenali and Richardson
Highways increases the value of the area for tourism.
Fielding Lake has high value for public recreation. It is recom-
mended for designation as a State Recreation Area.
The Castner, Canwell and Gulkana Glaciers will be retained in public
ownership and managed for recreation. The D•:lta River corridor flows
through a variety of terrain with sorne portions being highly scenic and
sorne stretches challenging for boating. ThE! river corridor will be
protected in a recreation designation.
The scenic values along the Richardson and Denali Highways will be
protected through management guidelines consistent with the Denali Scenic
Highway Study (DNR, 1982).
3-43
5. Fish and Wildlife
The East A 1 as ka Range subregi on
important for a variety of species.
areas throughout the Alaska Range
protection.
6. Sett 1 ement
contains habitat that is extremely
Mineral licks and peregrine falcon
require habitat designation and
The opportunities for land sales in this region are limited due to
the terrain. No areas have been identified for sale in this unit.
1. Transportation
The following access corridors have been identified by the Depart-
ment of Transportation and Public Facilities. There are no proposals for
act ua 1 construction of access wi thin these cor ri dors at this ti me, but
the option to eventually develop access in these areas should not be
precluded.
Richardson and Denali Highway Realignment: The Alaska Department of
Transportation and Publ1c Fac1l1t1es (DOT/PF) has future plans to recon-
struct and realign portions of the Richardson and Oenali Highways.
DOT /PF wi 11 work wi th the p 1 ann i ng team to choose the best rout i ng that
meets the land use objectives described in this report while still
complying with appropriate highway standards and project costs.
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline: A route, basically parallel to the
existing Trans-Alaska pipeline, is proposed for the construction of a
gas line from the North Slope to Fairbanks, and continuing either to the
Cana di an border vi a the A 1 as ka Hi ghway corridor or to Pri nee Wi 11 i am
Sound via the Richardson Highway and Trans-Alaska Pipeline corridor.
Trai 1 s and Revi sed Statu te ( RS) 2477 Roads: Numerous trai 1 s and
minor roads ex1st 1n th1s subregion. See Chapter 2, Public Access and
Trails Management for additional information.
3-44
"""'
:-
"""
-
lillO!
-
-
b
-
..,..;
....
--
"""'
-
-
..,..--------------------------------------=----------~------~~~--.,..,; ~"'~-
._
-
-
~
-
,_
-
LARl ŒB s:MWtY
EAST ALASKA lWIZ sœRI!GICH
( Refer to the maps at the back of this docu1nent)
---r;-----~---·---j_f!BJ ŒB œs:tœA'rrœs-
PRllœBD CLASSIPICA:rl
!Gt'r
t.mT/
sœœrr
A
PIWWa'
USE(S)
. PKBIBI'l'!!:D
SORF1ICE
USES
-Aellote cabins
-Land Sales
-Grazing
~------------+-----------Pemote cabins
-Land Sales
-Grazing
-
-Grazing
-Pemote cabins
-Land Sales
-Grazing
3-45
!1INERIUS
MQ41' OF
LFJIISE!\BLE
MJNERAtS
Cpen
Open
ctJen
-
Subregion 7
Upper Tanana
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6 . Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
-
-
·-
""""
~~
·-
'-'
·-----~~~~~~--·~=·---~~--=~~W.-&ti ....... "'"'-~ 'i!:<1l!!:lll0' --""'
lcAINAHt: uppertdndna lK)P: (chapterJ) 02
H. Subregion #7 -Upper Tanana
This subunit includes the communities of Northway, Mentasta Lake,
Tok, Tanacross, and Dot Lake. The A 1 as ka H1i ghway and the Tanana Ri ver
pass through the center of the unit, while the Glenn Highway extends frorn
Tok to Mentasta on the southwestern boundary of the subunit. Although
these highways provide excellent access to the communities in the region,
much of the area is mountainous and inaccessible.
Commercial guiding for big game, tourism, hunting, recreation,
mineral exploration, forestry, and sport and subsistence hunting are
major land uses in the subregion. Settlement in the subunit is largely
confined to areas along the Alaska Highway.
The area outside the State Forest will be managed for multiple use
including fish and wildlife and recreation. The northwestern part of the
region will also be managed to encourage subsurface development. Approx-
imately 8,687 acres are recommended for sale in this region. All lands
retained in state ownership will be open to mineral entry.
1. Agriculture
There are no areas recommended for large scale agriculture in this
subregion due to the high elevation and harsh climate. There is interest
in small scale agriculture in the area, however, and an area of 1,000
acres will be available for this purpose. The area most suitable for
this is to the east of Tok and the area southwest of Tok near the
junction of the two highways but north of the Eagle Trail.
Disposals Reco1111ended for Ag;riculture
Project
Tok Ag I
Tok Ag II
2. Forestry
Tot a 1
Net Acres
600
400
1,000
In this region, the legislatively-designated State Forest will
supply the wood needs of most of the communities. However, timber
harvesting will be allowed on all retained lands in the subregion.
3. Minerals
The Tok Massive Sulfides, located on the western edge of this sub-
region, represent one of the more significant mineral concentrations in
the state. The active claim blacks in the area between the Tok River and
Johnson Glacier wi 11 be managed for minerals as a primary use. There are
no known oil and gas or coal resources in this area.
3-46
TEXfNAME: Uppertanana (R)P: (cnapter3) 03
There are also several areas of high potential for minerals north of
the highway between Dot Lake and Northway and around Berry Creek south of
Dot Lake. These areas should be retained in public ownership and left
open to mineral entry.
4. Recreation
In this unit the Alaska and Glenn Highways provide physical and
visual access to high mountain recreation opportunities. Glaciers pro-
vide important routes into the high country. Numerous trails and
wildlife are important additional recreation resources. This subregion
is important to both tourists and local residents in the communities of
Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok, and Mentasta.
Several lakes, trails and access sites in this subregion will be
designated for recreation. Robertson Lakes are recommended for legisla-
tive designation.
Visual quality along the Alaska and Glenn highway corridors will be
protected.
5. Fish and Wildlife
The re are hi gh wi 1 d 1 ife va 1 ues in most of this subregi on. Many
areas of this region have high human use value, including the area south
of Tok along the Glenn Highway.
Mineral licks along the Tok and Robertson Rivers and Clearwater
Creek wi 11 be managed to protect them as critical habitat. The area
around 141:. Neuberger is recommended for legislative designation as a
Special Wildlife Management Area.
Areas along Yerrick Creek south of Cathedral Rapids, along the Tok
and Tanana Rivers near proposed disposals, and the majority of state-
owned land in the Tanacross and Northway areas will be managed for joint
recreation and habitat values. The remaining state-owned areas of this
region with the exception of the State Forest and djsposal areas will be
managed for multiple use, including wildlife habitat.
6. Land Sales in the Upper Tanana Subregion
In the Upper Tanana region, a total of 4,837 acres of subdivisions,
2,850 acres of fee si mp 1 e homesteads and 1 ,000 acres of ag ri cu 1 tu ra 1
homestead land will be offered for sale.
a. Land for Community Expansion
The Upper Tanana Region population is expected ta increase by 425
people by the year 2000 {Socio-Economic Paper, RAS/DLWM, 1982). If the
current population· of 1,120 people has adequate land to live on, then
between 425 and 1,700 acres would be required to meet the building needs
of the growing population (Settlement Element, DLWM, 1983).
'3-47
~
~
""""
....,;
-
-
w
i$1
_,
-
-..:
'liilll'
_.
--
-
-
-
·-
·-
-
"""
-
;~
------~------~~-~~·------~""'·~-~--,.,~~-........l_..._.,___,..~.__~,,m,,,.,,..~~~·~&""'""'-'=a~-----
Sales of cornmunity expansion land have t)een fairly popular in the
past: 59% of the acres offered have so 1 d. This 1 eaves a tata 1 of 1,662
acres available over-the-counter for cornmunity expansion needs in the
future. In addition to the land available over-the-counter, another
3,175 acres are proposed for sale over the next 20 years. This new
acreage however will not be sold before a sign·ificant percent of the land
currently available over the counter has been taken.
The Native Corporations also own land in the immediate vicinity of
most of the communities. Sorne of this land is likely to be sold over the
next 20 years.
Native landholdings and past state sales are likely to create a
large surplus of community expansion land in the subregion for ail of the
villages except Northway where no state land has been offered (the Native
corporation is planning ta offer sorne near Northway, however). In this
area, the state shOuld offer a smal1 subdivision of approximately 200
acres.
Disposals Recommended for Community Expansion
In the Upper Tanana
Project
Eag1e (over the counter)
Three Mile (over the counter)
Tok Area (over-the-counter)
Tower Bluffs (over-the-counter)
Eag le II
Glenn
Glenn Ext.
Northway I
Northway II
Seven Mi le
Tok New
Net Acres
159
163
1,080
260
55
1,000
120
100
100
800
1,000
Tot a 1 --4,837
b. Recreational and Self-Sufficient Subdivisions and
Homesteads
Past state sa 1 es of this type of 1 and in ttle subregi on have not been
particularly popular due largely to poor drainage and difficult access.
Only 10% of the available remote acreage has been staked. Native lands,
however, may offer higher quality land on lakes and rivers. Dot Lake is
considering offering land on Lake George and over the next 20 years other
corporations are likely to offer recreational land.
In this area it is proposed that the state continue to offer the
acres of land sti 11 available in past disposais before offering new
projects.
3-48
ltXINAME: Uppertanana (K)P; (cnapterJ) U~
Disposals Recommended for
Recreation Homesteads
Project
F1reweed (over the counter)
Robertson River
Tower Bluffs I
Tower Bluffs II
Tower B 1 uffs III
Tok Area I
Tok Area II
7. Transportation
Total
Net Acres
250
400
200
200
800
200
800
2,850
The following access corridors have been identified by the Depart-
ment of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT/PF). There are no
proposa 1 s for act ua 1 construction of access withi n the se cor ri dors at
this ti me, but the option to event ua lly deve 1 op ac cess in these a reas
should not be precluded.
Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline: A route, basically parallel to the
existing Trans-Alaska Pipeline, is proposed for the construction of a
gasline from the North Slope to Fairbanks, and continuing either to the
Canadi an Border vi a the Alaska Hi ghway corridor or to Pri nee Wi 11 i am
Sound via the Richardson Highway and Trans-Alaska Pipeline corridor.
A 1 as ka, Tok Cutoff and Taylor Hi ghways Real i gnment and Northway
Road: DOT/PF has future plans to reconstruct and realign portions of the
A'Ta'Ska, Tok Cutoff (Glenn) and Taylor Highways and Northway Road. In
sorne areas, this includes replacement of major bridges. DOT/PF will be
working with the planning team to choose the best routing that meets the
land use objectives described in this report while still complying with
appropriate highway standards and project costs.
Alaska Railroad Extension: A route has been identified through the
Tanana River and Alaska Highway corridors for an extension of t,he Alaska
Railroad from Fairbanks to the Canadian Border.
Prince William Sound-Upper Tanana Railroad Corridor: In this
subregion, a corridor has been identified by the Interior Alaska Trans-
portation Study for a railroad from Prince William Sound at Valdez or
Cordova to the Interior near Tok. Such a rai lroad would provide access
to the Delta Belt and other mining areas along the route~ The route
follows the Richardson and Tok Cutoff Highway corridors.
Delta Belt Access: In this subregion, corridors to the Delta Belt
mi nera 1 a rea have be en i dent i fied by the I nteri or A 1 as ka Transportation
Study. Access would be via a railroad spur line from either the Prince
William Sound railroad route or a spur line from an extension of the
Alaska Railroad from Fairbanks. An alternative would be raad access from
either the Alaska Highway or the Tok Cutoff.
3-49
IIOilà'
~
~
-
"""'
...
-
.,
·..,.i
-
~
....,;
-
..
'""""
'-'
""''
--
-
_,
'>.,"\..,...
--
-
,_
-
-
--------~-----~~-~--~,~-~~--~------------
3-50
----L---=~~~J -=-~~.
Numerous trai 1 s and
2, Pub 1 i c Access and
LAll) œB StMfARr
UPPER ~ SUBRBGIQI
(Re fer to the map; at the back. of this doetm~ent)
r-----T_::Àw-œE-Œs!~~-r--------~--~--·----~
AŒœiiD ~ --r·' KMr --PIOIIB:rl'ED !Df.r œ !DIE' œ
œn'/ PRIMAR!' SECCIIlARY SURPACB UJCI\.TABIB ~lB
sœonT ! OSE(S) 1 OSE(S) ~ USES MDIBlWS MINEllAtS 1 --+------1-------Re!!Ote cabins
A !Habitat -Land Sales 1 Open 1 Open
-Improved
pasture
grazing
~-----+---~ -------------t
L:IW Value
Res. Mgmt. Open Open 1
B-1 lîiâbJ.tat
Recreation j
R>restry
1------r:Se~: Hab-i~ta-t Re!!Ote cabins Cl_o_sed___ Cl~~-to--o:>a---1\
B-2 Settlement Recreation
C-1
Reloot---;-~ins r::----+-Land Sales ----
Grazing Open
Habitat 1 Forestry
:Recreation Open
1---~:-r--l -4------l---Habitat Re!!Ote cabins
c-2 Recreation Land Sales
Grazing 1 Open 1 Open
Open
~~-l-... 1 Recreation Re!!Ote cabins
C-3 · Habitat Forestry Land Sales
Grazing
Open
f----
1
}griaul,;;;,t·---r--;i,ins , a;;.;.-T~~
D-1 Settlement Forestry
1------------
E-1 Habitat
Re!!Ote cabins
Land Sales
Grazing
Open
1------1--Re!!Ote cabins Open --~---
E-2 Habitat Land Sales Throu;Jh
Grazing Leasehc;>ld
LocatJ.on
Habitat
Remote cabins Closed
Recreation
Open
Open
Settlement!Fo<estry
~--~ ---·-:t~-~~;+---1--------i
F-2 1 Habitat Recreation Land Sales
Forestry Imp. pasture
Open Open
grazing
1-------l-----1-------
F-3 Recreation
(State
Bec. Area)
Remote cabins
Land Sales
Grazing
Leases
Closed Closed
l-----l...------1-------1---1....------1-----------
3-51
-
...
..
'01!11!
~
'Ooil#
-
w
-
-'
-
-
......
·~
\;"'~
,_,
)~
,. ...
-
·-·
,_
'-'
!Gfl'
n,...,.,.A" AA .WZŒ!!, ;sJ;::::±;~,--~----~------'"""""'""-""~..$:'<1-'<Wtl!;_ Z:~tJ~M"'*""'~~-~.\'0 .... -~
LAND USE StJoiMARY
UPPER 'lNWIA SOBREX2ICH
( Bef er to the maps at the back of this document) ------------~-·--il> USE Œ'SI~
?œED Ct.!ISSIFIClmi -lLIIM> PKJEœED
MINERALS
----PKlBIBl'l'ED
ll4àRf s~
~(S) OSB(S} UNIT/ 1 PRll4àRf SUDD.".r USE
stJRP1ICB
USES
01~
IDC:ATAUU:
MINERAI:.S
G
H-1
I
J-1
-·--FOre
Hab
stry
tat
·-Value High
les -lltgmt.
Jijr l.ëi:i!'tü're
Hab
Recrl
FOres
Mine:
FOre
Habi
Recre
ât
at ion
l:.ry
âls
-·--
ât
---
try
at
ation
Value
~ e
High
Res
Jlqr
Sett
FOre
Habi
Reer'
Mine
Lement
atry
l:.at
!at ion
cals
----·-
stry
t:.at
..._.
---
Recreation
FOrestry
1-----
---
1--·----
Recreation
Re!rote cabins
Land Sales Open Open
Imp. pasture
grazing
-Remote cabins
Land Sales
Open Open
--.....
Remote cabins
Land Sales Open 1 Open
Improved
Pasture
Grazing
Re!rote cabins
Land Sales Open Open
Improved
pasture
grazing 1--·-------1-·
_____ __..
Remote cabins
Land Sales
Open Open
1----------1--
Remote cabins
Settlement Open Open
Imp. pasture
grazing
·----·-·-·
3-52
Subregion8
Goodpaster
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3 . Kantishna
4 . Parks
5 . Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
,_
.,_
~
'-'
._
-
,_
·-
._
'-"'
-~
..,..._'Ill a2 "'!!'-"' --·-~-==-~"""-~--l--,..,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.,,, ... ,.,,,.,,., •••• ,,, ... ,, .. ,,_""'~-~ ... ~""
TEXTNAME: Goodpaster (R)P: (chapter3) 02
G. Subregion #8 -Upper Goodpaster
This is one of the most remote subregions in the Basin. Located
about 30 miles east of Delta Junction, the unit is a rugged area with no
roads and few settlements.
Sorne trapping and hunting occurs in the area, but the major land use
is mining exploration through most of the unit and active mining in the
eastern third of the subregion. There are habitats and forests of
moderate value in this subregion, but existing information indicates that
minerals are the principal resource in much of the region. A few trap-
ping cabins and mining cabins exist, but settle!ment is sparse due to the
1 ack of access.
This area will be managed primarily for minerals and fish and
wildlife habitat.
1. Agriculture
Land in this subregion is at elevations in excess of 2000 feet and
is not recommended for agricultural designation ..
2. Forestry
In the Upper Goodpaster Subregion of tht~ Tanana Plan, the State
Forest will meet the demands for bath local use and economie develop-
ment. There are sorne fairly high value forests in this subregion which
were not incl uded in the State Forest, but they are tao remo te to be of
signifi eance in meeting the foreseeab 1 e comme rd al or persan al need for
wood products. However, these lands will be open to timber harvesting
and other multiple uses.
3. Minerals
The principal mineral potential in this subregion occurs in the
Upper Goodpaster River and the Tibbs Creek are!a. Active placer mining
occurs in numerous tributaries of Tibbs Cre1ek. Although there are
currently few mining claims located in the subregion, there is moderate
to high potential for discovery of economie deposits. No coal or hydra-
carbon formations are known within the area, but the Goodpaster Subregion
will be left open to mineral entry, coal prospecting, oi1 and gas
leasing, coal leasing and leasing for millsites.
4. Recreation
Due to its remote location and 1 ack of navigable ri vers, this are a
does not have high value for public recreation. However, the trails in
the are a wi 11 be protected and recreation al use of the ri vers wi 11 be
ensured.
3-53
5. Fish and Wildlife
The habitat of this region is of moderate value. The Goodpaster
River corridor, however, is of high value and will be protected for its
habitat values. Two settlement areas are designated along the river and
will be designed to minimize the impact on fish and wildlife. The rest
of this unit will be retained in public ownership and managed jointly for
habitat and minerals. Conflicts between these two uses will be addressed
in the subunit guidelines.
6. Land Sales in the Upper Goodpaster Subregion
Within the Goodpaster Subregion, a total of 3,400 acres of state
land are recommended to be sold for fee simple homesteading.
In the past, there have been no land sales in this region. Because
the area is largely inaccessible, only two areas have been identified for
sale. These projects are expected to provide adequate opportunity for
those wishing to settle or recreate in this remote region of the Basin.
Fee Simple Homesteads:
Sand Creek
Upper Goodpaster
7. Transportation
400 acres
3,000 acres
The following access corridors have been identified by the Depart-
ment of Transportation and Public Facilities. There are no proposals for
actual construction of access within these corridors, but the option to
eventually develop access in these areas should not be precluded.
The only identified major transportation impact in this subregion is
in the extreme western portion near the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. The
construction of a natural gas pipeline could pass through this area. No
other major transportation corridors have been ident ifi ed through this
subregion.
Trail s and Revi sed Statute (RS) 2477 Roads: Numerous trail s and
minor roads exist in this subregion. See Chapter 2, Public Access and
Trails Management for additional information.
3·54
"
-
lii1llli
II'IOÎ
-
>illlli!
"""'
-
-
-
""""
-
-
-
-
-
-
1111\lÎi
-
·-
-
-
-
-
·.,~
,.,...,..
... -= ~ .... ~ -~, -~~~~ -~~-~~· -··~-.----~-·--·-·-----·-·
IARl œE Sl:llmRY
OPPBR <IXDPI!STER SlJBtti!Xml'i
(Paf er to the maps at the back of this docuruant} r-----, IRÎl œs œs~J ------~-----lmŒRALS
PliJEICSED a.l!SSIPICAfi -------tGfr r---PlOI[Br.lm tGrr œ bDfr OF
UNI'l'/ PRIMAR! SI!CCHlAJ.« SURF11CE UJCATAB;[.E :t.E'ASPABLB
StB:Jtr.r OSE(S) OSB(S} tJSBS MINERAI:IS MINERAIS ------1-·----
rbrestry Recreation Land Sales
A Habitat Improved <:pen <:pen
pasture
grazing -------..
Recreation RenDte cabins Closed Closed to coal
B-1 Settlement Habitat
---
B-2 Habitat rbrestry Grazing <:pen <:pen
Recreation
-.. .~
RenDte cabins
c Habitat Land Sales <:pen ~
Grazing ------
3-55
Chapter4
Implementation
·-
,_.
·-
-
,_,
"'-
"""'
--
··-~~-~--~~~==~-"-=-· ~.~~-"~~~-.!.----·--=="~~"""-~"""'~"""'---
'tA li~AI'It: ltll-\1-'4 ~ r< J r' : \en apt er'+) uc::
I. Introduction
This chapt er summari zes the actions necessary to impl ement the 1 and
use policies proposed by this area plan. These actions include proposals
for legislative designation of certain lands 1, recommended land selec-
tions, and preparation of management pl ans. Most of these proposed
actions are discussed in more detail in other portions of the plan. For
example, proposals for législative designations are included in the
management intent summaries for several of the subregions.
In addition to the implementation recorrmendations, this chapter
di scusses several proposed transportation corridors. These corridors
wi 11 require substanti ally more study bef ore they are recommended for
construction. However, the option to develop access in these corridors
should not be precluded.
Once the plan is adopted these implementation actions will be used
as a basi s for budget preparation incl udi ng requests for changes in staff
levels and requests for legislative funding of capital improvements, data
collection or other actions necessary to implemE!nt the plan.
4-1
l~/\.I•U~t•4-., lloJI\1 ""T \ '/1,. \''""''J"""'~'"""-• / "-"._..
A. Priorities for Legislative and Administrative Designation
A number of areas within the Tanana Basin are being considered for
recommendation for legislative designation as either aState t~ail,
recreatiQnal river, recreational area, critical habitat, or wildfiTE!
managemenC§:rè_~ These -pr-o-posed desig-nations-serve as offTcTaT
recognition of the outstanding public values in these areas and of
the sta.te' s intef!_:L_to .retain ~es~ _areas ___ i!!___pJ,Ipl iç__ __ qwnership in
perpetu1ty. A 1 egi sl atwe des1gnat1on is recommended when an are a
proposed by the pl an for long-term retention passes ses such high
resource values that:
1. It is clear that the area should remain in public ownership
permanently; and/or
2. The nature and value of the resources present requi re more
restrictive management for their protection than is possible
under a general multiple use classification.
The areas being considered for special designations are shawn below
in arder of the priority for such designations. The total area
proposed for legislative designation is approximately 500,000 acres
or 2% of the total study area. For additional information on
individual proposals, see the management unit summaries in Chapter
3.
The following areas proposed for legislative designation will have
management prescriptions prepared by Division of Parks and Outdoor
Recreation {DPOR). DPOR will also present the proposals ta the
legislature and manage the trai1, area or river if it is approved.
Interim management will be the responsibility of the Division of
Land and Water Management, following the guidelines specified in the
management units in Chapter 3.
1. State Recreation Rivers
River or Stream
a. Chat ani ka
b. Nenana River
Acre age
1 57,700 -J
3,000
Subregion
Borough
Parks Highway
These streams and rivers are extremely valuable ta the region's
economy and environment. They are heavily used by the public
for floating, boating and transportation to hunting areas. The
riparian habitat is also important for moose and other mammals.
The Chatanika is a popular fishing area.
4-2
~
-
....i
-
-
-
~
,_,
-
-
-
"-
'-
....
-
----~----·-------,--···---------·-·~·==="-"'""""--~-~-~---
ll-1\.lli/\I'JL... lùMr'"'t \t\)f'"• \\ .. diUf-11,.-..::;i-r) v.,.
The proposed state recreational rive!r boundaries run approxi-
mately one-quarter mile 1 andward on each si de of the river.
Within these areas, 1 and and water would be managed for multiple
use, including hunting, fishing, and ether recreational activ-
ities, habitat management, timber har·vesting, and water quality
protection. Timber management activities are secondary uses in
the corridors; they wi 11 be designE~d to protect and enhance
habitat and recreation values and witter quality. land sales
will be prohibited in these corridors; however, public use
cabins and in sorne instances commercial recreation facilities
will be allowed. Provisions will be made for ac cess ac ross the
river and for existing mining claims. The corridors will be
closed to new mineral entry.
2. State Trails
Trai 1
a. Circle-Fairbanks Trail
Len~
approx. 60 mi .
Subregion
Borough
The Circle-Fairbanks Historie Trail is the original route
between Circle City and Fa·irbanks. Portions of the trail within
the Borough and Tanana Basin boundal"ies are separated into a
summer ridgetop trail and a winter sled route along the
Chatanika River. The portion of the trail between Cleary Summit
and Coffee Dame is used extensively for mining access. With the
exception of a small black of patentred mining claims near the
beginning of the trail at Cleary Summit, this trail lies on
State lands.
Because of the high mineral potential of this area, major
efforts have been made to coordinate development of the trail
with mining interests. Careful planning of this trail to coor-·
dinate mining and recreation use cou1d help promote a more
balanced public perception of the role of mineral development in
the economy of Interior Alaska.
b. Chena Hot Springs Winter Trail approx. 50 mi. Borough
The Chena Hot Springs Winter Trail is the original winter sled
route between Chena Hot Springs and Fairbanks. The trail origi-
nated in the earl y 1900' s and has be1en used extensively since
th at ti me. Current uses of the trail incl ude dogmushing, snow-
machining, horseback riding and moving farm equipment.
c. North Fork Valley Trail 13 mi. Borough
The North Fork Valley Trail extends approximately 13 miles
northeast from Chen a Hot Springs Raad toward the Borough and
Tanana Basin boundaries. The trai1 is an extension of the
Chena Hot Springs Winter Trail and was used in the 1983 Yukon
Quest Dogsled Race.
4-3
TEXTNAME: TBAP4 (R)P: (chapter4) 05
The trail is used mainly by cross country skiers, dogmushers and
snowmachines. A major portion of this trail passes through the
Far Mountain di sposal and i s used for access through this are a.
The minimum width of each of these trails is 200• where they pass
through disposals. Actual trail widths will be determined when the
management prescription for each trail is written. It is likely that
widths along each trai1 may vary depending on topography and adjacent
uses.
3. Recreation Areas
a. Robertson Lakes State Recreation Area
15,000 acres --Upper Tanana Subreqion
approximately
This is a very popular fishing and camping area. It would
be managed for multiple use provided that these uses are
consistent with the primary goal of providing recreation and
protecting the visual quality of the area.
b. Fielding Lake State Recreation Area --30,700 acres --East
Alaska Range
The area proposed for designation is highly scenic with
opportunities for recreational activity on bath Fielding and
Summit Lake and summer and winter back country exploration.
Due ta the lack of trees, high water table and permafrost,
the area is very susceptible ta degredation of wild and
natural landscapes. The area would be managed to protect
the integrity of the landscape and maintain the recreational
values.
c. Other Recreation Areas and Sites
There are several additional recreation areas and sites
reconmended in the plan. Although they are less than 640
acres in size and may be handled administratively by an ILMA
to DPOR rather than requiring legislative designation, they
are included here because the overall intent of protecting
an outstanding public value through long term retention is
the same.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
White Mountains Access Sites --up ta 8 -lOO acre
sites --Borough
Brown Lake State Recreation Area --640 acres --Lower
Tan ana
Grapefruit Rocks State Recreation Area --600 acres --
Lower Tanana
Forrest Lake State Recreation Area --5 acres --Upper
Tan ana
Tanana Valley Overlook --2 acres
Davidson Ditch Historie Sites --
acreage to be determined by DPOR --
4·4
Borough
number of sites and
Borough
lllliil
lllllil
...,;
..
-
-
-
lllllil
"""
-
....
illl!<i
N
-
""""
-
-
1...
""~
-
.....
è-
(7)
(8)
(9)
, __________ ,--~~~-~=ta !Jjtt]_ ~...,..,.,_, ______ ~--~~~---~,
June Creek State Recreation Site --500 acres --Parks
Hutl i nana Hot Springs Recreation Site --640 acres --
Lm-1er Tanana
Pa ra di se Hi 11 Recrea ti on Si te --640 acres --Upper
Tanana
4. Wildlife Areas
The ADF&G vti11 prepare management prescriptions in conjunction \'iitt1
ONR for the following wildlife area proposals and present them to the
legislature. After these areas are approved, the Special Wildlife
Management Areas wi 11 be managed by DNR in consultation vJith ADFt.G. The
Toklat Critical Habitat area Hill be managed by ADF&G.
a. Tok River Special Wildlife Management Area --approximately
166,000 acres --Upper Tanana Subregion
This area is one of the most productive grizzly, moose and
sheep habitats in the state and is a heavily-used hunting
area. It would be managed for multiple use to the extent
consistent with the primary goal of protection of the habi-
tat. Land sales, remote cabins and grazing would be prohib-
ited due to the conflict with the wildlife values. The unit
is open to mineral entry.
b. Toklat Critical Habitat Area --2,000 acres Kantishna
Subregion
An area of about 2,000 acres on th1e Toklat River which is
critical salmon spawning habitat and prime grizzly habitat
is recommended for legislative designation as a Critical
Habitat Area. The area would be managed primarily for fish
and wildlife and it would be closed to r.1ineral entry.
c. Minto Flats Special Wildlife Management Area --270,000
acres --Lower Tanana Subregion
The ~1into Flats is a large v1etland ~thich is outstanding
habitat for many species of wildlife and critical habitat
for sorne species of waterfowl. The area is also very
ifllportant for both subsistence and s.port hunters. It vmuld
be r:1anaged primarily for fish and wildlife and it would be
closed to mineral entry.
B. Land Trades, Relinquishments and Selections
1. Land Trades and Relinquishments
The planning team recommends that the Stampede Trail a rea
(three townships) be exchanged with the Park Service. The
unit is discussed in more detail in Parks HighvJay Subregion,
Management Unit E.
4-5
C. Management Plans
One management plan is proposed for the Basin which would involve a
detailed study of trails. This plan should locate and map important
trails, determine the principle uses, recommend ~·Jhether public ownership
or easements are ~1arranted and ~-shat widths these should be, recommend
priorities for surveying and provide management guidelines for protecting
the principal uses. The plan should be done cooperatively with the
Borough and it should specify management intents for each trail.
O. Instream Flow Reservations
The follov1ing is a list of the rivers identified in the Tanana
Basin which require instream flow reservations. These may not be the
only streams on \>lhich a reservation is needed and it is likely that
further study will identify others. These rivers represent priorities in
terms of needing instream flow reservations.
Fi rst priori ty ri vers incl ude the Chatani ka, the Sa 1 cha and the
Toklat. These rivers require regulation in order to protect their high
habitat quality, In addition, the Chatanika and the Salcha have recrea-
tion values for boating and fishing and are important clearv1ater
streams. The Toklat is a critical salmon spawning river.
The Delta, The Goodpaster, and the Nenana rivers are the next order
of pri ority for i nstream flow reservations. These ri vers are important
for both habitat and recreation.
Finally, the Tolovana, Teklanika, Cosna, Kantishna and Robertson
rivers should be studied for necessary instream flow reservations to
protect habitat and recreation values and to provide for the settlements
on the Teklanika, Cosna and Kantishna rivers.
The relative importance and method of preserving instream flow in
the se ri vers will need to be determi ned by fu rthe r study. It i s recom-
mended that exal'lination of these rivers should be jointly undertaken by
OLWM, ADF&G and where appropriate, DPOR.
E. Transporation
1. I nt roduct ion
The design of an efficient regional transportation syster.1
wi 11 be key to res ource deve 1 opment and a major determine nt of
land use patterns within the Tanana Basin.
4-6
~
""""
-
""""
-
Diil
...
-
...
-
-
1-,
-
·-----·-·--------~-~...,.,.,.,....,. . .,.,._.,,,.,,=~-·~··=""""==-·=----"'"""'~~--·-~"""""=-~~~-""'-~--
Due to the scale of this plan, it is not possible to iden-
tify actual routes of proposed roads and rail roads. However,
general transportation corridors have been · ident ifi ed. These
corridors could facil itate resource devel opment, i ncrease oppor-
tunities for public recreation and tourism and open land for
settlement. The corridors are consistent writh the Interior
Alaska Transportation Study, the Western and Arctic Alaska
Transportation Study and various studies conducted by the Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facil i ti es (DOT /PF) and
ethers.
Before any of these corridors are actually built, it will be
necessary ta see if: 1) the resources ta be transported would
economically justify the capital improvements necessary; 2) the
total benefit of building the raad or railroadl would exceed the
financial, environmental and social costs.
These corridors are not recommendations for construction.
They are mentioned here because the option ta eventually con-
struct roads or rail roads through them should be protected.
2. Proposed Transportation Corridors
a. Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline
Three alternative routes for the construction of a pipeline
to carry natural gas from the North Sl op1~ ta the Lower 48
have been identified. The route from the North Slope ta
Fairbanks basically follows the existing Trans-Alaska Pipe-
1 ine. One al ternat ive would construct the gasl i ne from
Fairbanks via the Richardson/Alaska Highway and Tanana River
corridor ta Delta Junction and the Canadian Border. The
second alternative follows the same route ta Delta Junction
but continues via the Richardson Highway and Trans-Alaska
Pipeline corridor to Prince William Sound. The third route
would follow the Parks Highway and Alaska Railroad corridor
from Fairbanks ta Cook Inlet. However, this last alterna-
tive route would confl ict with 1 and use objectives for the
Nenana River Corridor area (see F-2, in Parks).
b. Alaska Railroad Extension
An extension of the Alaska Railroad from Fairbanks would
provide access ta the Del ta Belt and cou'ld prov ide a con-
nection to Canada ·and the Lower 48. Additionally, spur
lines could provide access ta the Slate Creek asbestos
deposit off the Taylor Highway. A route has been identified
through the Tanana Basin via the Tanana River and Richardson
and Alaska Highway corridors for an extension of the rail-
raad from Fairbanks ta the Canadi an Border ..
4-7
c. Prince William Sound-Upper Tanana Railroad Corridor
The Interior Alaska Transportation Study identified the
construction of a railroad from either Valdez or Cordova as
an alternate ta the extension of the Alaska Railroad. This
would serve as the transportation system for development of
the Delta Belt and possibly the Slate Creek asbestos
deposit. This route follows the Richardson and Tok Highway
corridors from Prince William Sound toward Tok.
d. Western Access Railroad Corridor
Should the development of minera1s in the western portion of
the State occur, the construction of a railroad has been
identified as a possible means of transporting goods ta and
from the area. The Interior Alaska Transportation Study and
the Western and Aret ic A 1 as ka Transportation Study ident i-
fied a corridor from Nenana to Tanana south of the Tanana
River. From Tanana the rail line would continue toward the
Bornite area and possibly to Nome. An alternate ta the
railroad would be a highway which would not pass through the
area covered by this plan.
e. Twin Mountain Access Route
The Twin Mountain area has the most potential for mineral
development within the Fairbanks North Star Borough. Three
alternatives have been identified as possible access
routes. The route identified by the Interior Alaska Trans-
portation Study as the most feasible one is an extension of
Chena Hot Springs Raad. This would follow the Middle Fork
Chena River and would extend the raad approximately sixty-
five miles. Two other possible routes are: an extension of
Johnson Raad or a new raad up the Salcha River Valley.
However, the Salcha River Valley route would conflict with
1 and use objectives as defined in this pl an and it is not
recommended.
f. Lignite-Kantishna Highway Corridor
Any mineral development of the Kantishna Hills would require
an access route. The existing Denali Park Raad is substand-
ard in all respects and is inadequate for transporting the
vehicles needed for mining. This corridor would connect
Kantishna to the Parks Highway near Lignite (Healy) and
would ut il ize portions of the exi sting Stampede Raad. In
addition ta mineral development, this route could provide an
alternate raad for tourists wanting to see Mount McKinley
and Den ali National Park and Preserve, depending on the
degree of mining development that occurs. This corridor was
analyzed by the Interior Alaska Transportation Study. This
plan strongly recommends that this new route, if con-
structed, be located to minimi ze adverse impacts on the
caribou calving grounds found in this area.
4-8
ii!Ol!i
-
-
IIOfll
-
....,
-
....
,....
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
1-
-
""~
3.
'-"
'~·-'-'--~~---------~--"'"'"''"-""'~"""-~---""""'-·_,.,-
g. Nenana-Kantishna-McGrath Highway Corridor
The main aspect of this corridor is that it provides an
alternate access route to the Kantishna area. Overall, the
route would connect the Parks Highway from Ferry in a
westerly direction, then southwesterly to Kantishna and
possibly onto McGrath should a connection th1ere be desired.
h. Upper Wood River (Bonnifield Mining District) Access
This area has significant potential for hardrock mining
development of lead, zinc, gold and silver· with and has
active exploration and development project,ed through the
1980' s. A corridor has been identified to this area from
the Parks Highway at Ferry, easterly along the foothills of
the Alaska Range. A less desirable alternate is along the
Bonnifield Trail from Fairbanks which passes through the
Blair Lakes Bombing and Gunnery Range.
i. Nenana-Totchaket Area Access
With the future development of the Nenana-Totchaket area for
agriculture, the need for access will certainly increase.
Routes for roads and/or railroad spurs have been identified
and these rights-of-way shall be protected. Additionally,
this route could be extended to the Kantishna River to pro-
vide access ta the forestry area. At the current time it is
unlikely that sufficient timber volume exists ta justify a
raad, but changing market conditions could make this route
viable in the long term. Another possibility would be an
extension south to form a loop ta the Parks Highway at Rex
which would provide access to previous state land
disposals.
Existing Transportation Routes
a. Highway Reconstruction, Realignment and Improvements
Many highways or segments· of highways are substandard in
wi dth, curv a ture, design speed or cap ac i ty. The se wou 1 d
possibly include all or portions of the Alas~ka, Richardson,
Parks, Dalton, . Steese, Ell iott, Taylor, Den ali and Tok
Cutoff Highways and Northway Raad. The A 1 as ka Department of
Transportation and Public Facil ities (DOT/PF) has proposed
sorne of these projects and will seek funding according to
regional priorities. DOT/PF will work with various agencies
and the planning team to choose the best routting that meets
the land"use objectives described in this report while still
complying with Legi sl at ive mandates, appropria te highway
standards and project costs. This pl an dOi:!S not precl ude
improvements recommended by DOT /PF for E~ng i neeri ng and
public safety considerations.
4-9
b. Trails and Revised Statute (RS) 2477 Roads
Numerous trails and ninor roads, sorne of which are claimed
under Revised Statute (RS) 2477, traverse the area in this
report. See Chapter 2, Public Access and Trails ~1anagenent
for additional information.
F. Land Sales Program in the Tanana Basin: 1986 -2000
1. Introduction
The following section discusses the land sales progran in the Tanana
Basin for the next 20 years. Included is a section on l'lhat will be done
with past subdivision and remote sale areas; changes that should be made
in the 1986 land disposal program; and a list of the short and long term
sale areas in the Basin.
2. Disposal Schedule
The Department wi 11 pub 1 i sh annua lly a statewi de 1 and offeri ng and
disposal plan. It is important that Alaskans be able to review the
amounts and locations of land disposals which would result fron the
application of DNR 1 s land disposal policies. The statewide disposal plan
will incorporate regional land disposal plans and present recommendations
for 1 and offeri ngs in each regi on of the state. The recommendati ons
would be based on DNR 1 s land disposal policies as well as on analyses of
land suitability, supply and demand studies, consideration of competing
1 and use va 1 ues, transportation systems and other factors of regi on a 1
concern.
The statewide plan will present regional land offering recomt.~enda
tions for t"~>IO planning periods. Five-year recommandations will be
specifie regarding location, acreage and project type for each year. A
twenty-year disposal pool also will be established consisting of the
areas where DNR anticipates future disposals offerings.
This disposal plan that is included in this section v1ill be a guide
for the Division of Land and Water as it nominates projects into the LAOS
process. The Division of Land and Water needs flexibility to change from
this plan and alter the specifie acreages and the year certain projects
are offered, hm·1ever the follm-1ing minimum guidelines must be met by the
disposal section when they develop each years program:
4-10
•
"<!ff
-
"""'
*'1ll
~
-
..,.j
-
liMiî
-
-
--
-
,_,
'-
,_
, ___ ,, ____ -~-~--·--~-~-~-· ---~---------
1. To ensure that there is adequate land for sale in the Tanana
Basin over the life of this plan the state will offer, starting in 1987
no r.10re than 1,000 acres of nev1 subdivisions per year; 3,000 acres of ne"'
fee homesteading per year; and 1250 acres of nev1 agriculture sales per
year. These projects will come from areas identified for sale in the
Tanana Rasin, Nenana-Totchaket, and Delta Salcha Area Plans. The maximum
acreage for agriculture may change if it is decided tl1at agriculture
homesteading or small agriculture sales will be al1o~t1ed in the Nenana-
Totchaket a rea.
2. The state will attempt to offer at least one new project
each year in each of the 8 regions of the Tanana Basin.
3. The state \li 11 spread the sa 1 e of th12 hi gh qua 1 i ty 1 ands
equally over the life of this plan.
To meet goals 2 and 3, the Division of Land and Water will begin
offering certain projects in phases, rather than all at once. For
example, a large sale of high quality land like the one on Wein Lake
and the one on the Teklanika will be offered over 7 or 8 years. This
vi/ill ensure that there are high quality offerings available through the
life of the plan, and that there are enough areas available so a project
can be offered each year in the various regions of the Basin.
Because of the need to respond to changing demands, fluctuating
funding levels and new information, the Division of Land and Water will
periodically review the plan's allowed level of annual disposals. f"linor
departures from the disposal target figures (less than 25% increase in
one year or less than a 10~~ i ncrease over any fi ve year peri od) can be
made by the Division without a plan amendment. Substantial departures
from the plans disposal targets, however, require a plan amendment as
described in Appendix I.
If an i nteragency planning team determines that more settl ement 1 and
needs to be identified, the settlement policies in Ghapter 2 of the plan
as well as the management intent statements for each subregion and
management unit should be used as a guide ta identifying the additional
acreage. The first areas the planning team will examine, in light of
these pol ici es, for possible inclusion into the settlement pool are the
following areas: Eureka Rernote, Overland Agriculture, Sam Creek and Dot
Lake Remote. If more land is needed the planninH team will look for
further settlement land in management units that l1ave settlement as a
secondary use.
4·11
TEXTNAME: TBAP4 (R)P: (chapter4) 14
3. Past Sale Areas
This section of the plan outlines what should be done with the areas
that have been offered for sale in the past.
a. Past Subdivisions
All subdivisions that have been offered in the past that still have
acres that were not sold should remain available for sale over the
counter. The following is a list of those projects.
Project
Bears Den
Desperation
Hayes Creek
Haystack Ext.
Haystack
McC1oud
Olnes E.
Wigwam
Deadman Lake
Kentucky Creek
Geskakmina Lake
Iksgiza
Kindamina Lake
West Twi n Lake
Anderson
Farmview
June Creek
Nenana South
Panguingue
Rex
Eagle
Three Mile
Tok Area
Tower 81 uffs
Total
b. Past Remote Projects
Net Acres
134
146
465
340
97
143
132
77
533
543
205
227
193
119
1200
349
1115
147
827
43
159
163
1080
260
89697
The fo11owing remote project areas should be changed over to
"'i!'
liOiiJ
illlllli
lai!
..
lai!
Oi!Jll
al
iiOiiJI
-
...
homesteading areas and offered over the counter as saon as possible. •
-
-
4·12
ifliiÎ
"-
-
'-
,_
-
-
'-
-
-
-------------------,~·~-=~-· -----~·=' "TI"' "~!I>!INO!!L~(;'Io;~~"-·---~~~~~,__W.~~~-=""~-~--~''-
Project
Any Creek
Caribou Creek
Chena South
Far r1ountai n
Hunts Creek
West Fork
Dugan Hills
Cannon
Snoshoe
Zitziana
Bear Creek
Sl ate Creek
Wi ndy Creek
Fi reweed
Acres Available as
of (4/84)
100
1440
600
2400
600
4000
7000
1700
1600
2500
400
1000
4000
250
Total 27,590
There are several past remote projects that should be offered for
sale through the homesteading program, however because of the popularity
of the projects and the limited number of sales of similiar quality in
the Basin, the areas should be offered over several years rather than all
at once. Outlined below is a list of projects and years that the area
should be offered. In the years the project is scheduled for sale only a
limited number of packets should be offered.
Project Year Acre
Kanti sima I Over tt1e Counter 3000
Kantishna II After 1991 3000
Lake Minchunina After 1991 400
Gold King I 1987 lOO
Gold King II 1991 100
Go 1 d Ki n g III After 1991 200
Uood River I 1989 100
Wood Ri ver II After 1991 150
Total 7,050
2. 1986 Disposal Program
The 1986 disposal program, as it currently stands, contains
approximately 40% of the high quality co~nunity expansion land identified
by the plan in the Borough. Rather than sell such at signifigant portion
of the total available land in one year, the land will be spread over 20
years. Only one project (probably Emma Creek) wi 11 be sol d in 1986 and
the rest of the projects Hill be delayed for sale in later years (this
includes Big Eldorado, Fairbanks Odd Lots, Little Birch, O'Connor,
Riverwood, Skiview, Smallwood, and Tanglewood Heights).
4-13
3. New Disposal Projects
The following tables are a tentative listing of projects that will
be sold in the short tem (before 1991) and the long term (after 1991).
The Division of Land and Water Management will use these lists as a guide
for developing its yearly disposal program.
a. Short Term Projects
Project
Aggie Creek East I Ag
Aggie Creek East II Ag
Eielson II Ag
Goldstream Ag
Gal dstream I Ag
Goldstream II Ag
Kobe I Ag
Kobe II Ag
Kobe III Ag
Kobe IV Ag
Kobe V Ag
Snoshoe Pass I Ag
Snoshoe Pass II Ag
Snoshoe Pass III Ag
Tatalina I Ag
Tata 1 ina II Ag
Tata 1 ina III Ag
Tok Ag I
Two f·1i 1 e Lake Ag
Wi ndy I Ag
Short Term
Agricultural Oisposals
(before 1991)
1
TOTAL
4·14
Net Acres 1
750
750
2000
5735
6615
5000
1500
1830
750
750
750
500
500
500
500
500
500
400
2500
750
1
33,080
\
..
-
;....
.,...
.,
.....
-
~
~
-
--------·----·-·-~.,.._,.---~---·---~-----------~~~~~~~~,~---
-
-
~
'"""
"'""'
,_
,_
-
!r...l\ti1,UI"-• IWI~I' \•\}~ • \_, ...... t""'"-' 'J ....,,
Short Term
Fee Simple Homesteads
(before 1991)
Project
Aggie Creek East I HS
Aggie Creek East II HS
Aggie Creek HS
Anderson New I HS
Bearpaw HS
Clear Sky HS
Cosna Lower I HS
Cosna Lower II HS
Geskakmina Lk I HS
Gold King I HS
Go 1 d Ki ng II HS
Healy HS
Left Fork Addition HS
Mari ana HS
Montana Creek HS
Mt Ryan HS
Mucha Lake I HS
Mucha Lake II HS
Ridge Rock HS
Sand Creek HS
Snohomish Lake HS
Snoshoe Pass I HS
Snoshoe Pass II HS
Southwind HS
Tatal ina HS
Tekl anik a I HS
Teklanika II HS
Teklanika III HS
Tok Area I HS
Tower Bluffs I HS
Tower Bluffs II HS
Upper Goodpaster I HS
Upper Goodpaster II HS
Wein Lake I HS
Wein Lake II HS
Wein Lake III HS
Westridge I HS
Westridge II HS
White Mountain I HS
Wood River I HS
4-15
Net Acres
1500
1500
4000
500
2500
5000
3000
3000
750
lOO
lOO
4840
120
1000
400
3000
1000
1500
400
400
1000
500
500
1000
500
500
250
250
200
200
200
500
500
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
lOO
TOT At 46,810
TEXTNAME: TBAP4 (R)P: (chapter4) ld
Project
Alder Creek II S
Anderson New I S
Aspenwood S
Berg S
Eagle II S
Emma Creek I S
Emma Creek II S
Eureka Community I S
Eureka Community II S
Glenn S
Little Birch I S
Little Birch II S
Little Birch III S
Little Birch IV S
Little Willow S
Martin S
Murphy S
Northway I S
Otto Lake I S
Otto Lake II S
Riverview I S
Riverview II S
Riverview III S
Snohomish Lake I S
Snohomish Lake II S
Snoshoe I S
Snoshoe II S
Springview S
Summit Lake I S
Summit Lake II S
Tatal ina I S
Tofty I S
Tofty II S
Vi 11 age Vi ew S
Wein Lake 1 S
Wein Lake II S
Wein Lake Ill S
Westridge I S
West ridge II S
Whoopie I S
Whoopie II S
Short Term
Subdivisions
(before 1991)
4·16
Net Acres
200
200
250
329
55
260
140
lOO
100
1000
150
250
250
250
lOO
1000
204
lOO
75
75
1223
lOO
100
50
50
300
200
300
50
50
100
100
100
200
lOO
75
75
lOO
lOO
lOO
100
TOTAL 8~661
~
,.!
.....
""""
IO!jji
~
~
•
..,.,
......
-
-
-
-
......
......
-
•
-
-
·-
""""'
"-
----=="""'~"""-~'""~---"~~~~ -.-.-~-~~..,.~--~~-----~~~~--_w-...m-,
4. Long Term Projects
The following charts show the amount of land in different programs
recommended for sale in the long tenn (after 1991). Many of these pro-
jects vdll require further study or v1ill likely be more feasible if
better access becomes available.
Project
Anderson New II S
Big Eldorado S
Bigwood
Fbks Odd Lots
Fox S
Glenn Ext. S
Hutlitakwa S
Lake Minch New S
Land Swap s
Nenana North S
Nenana Ridge I S
Northway II S
o•conner s
Riverviev1 IV S
Riverwood S
Se ven Hile S
Ski vie~·~ S
Smallwood S
Snohomish Lake III S
Snoshoe III S
Summit Lake III S
Tanglewood Hts S
Tatal ina II S
Tok New S
Village View Ext. S
Wein Lake IV S
West ridge III S
Whoopie III S
Long Term
Subdivisions
(after 1991)
4-17
l
TOTAL
Net Acres 1
800
150
120
40
250
120
1400
100
300
300
1000
100
200
300
30
800
300
250
200
400
50
120
200
1000
lOO
450
200
250
9,530
TEXTNAME: TBAP4 (R)P: (chapter4) 19
Project
Chump Ag
Globe Creek Ag
Julius Creek Ag
Kobe VI Ag
Lost Ag
Snoshoe Pass IV Ag
Tatal ina IV Ag
Tok Ag II
Wilbur Ag
Wilbur Jr. Ag
Windy II Ag
Project
Anderson New II HS
Chitanana HS
Cosna Upper HS
Geskakmina Lk II HS
Globe Creek HS
Gold King III HS
Kanti shna II HS
Kindamina Lake HS
Lake Minch HS
Lignite HS
Robertson River HS
Snoshoe Pass III HS
Tekl ani ka IV HS
Tok Area II HS
Tower Bluffs III HS
Long Term
Agricultural Disposals
( after 1991)
TOTAL
Long Term
Fee Homesteads
( after 1991)
Upper Goodpaster III HS
Wein Lake IV HS
Westridge III HS
White Mountain II HS
Wood River II HS
TOTAL
4-18
.....
ltll!'
"""' Net Acres
1000
500 -1000
750
1000 ~
1000
600
1000
1000
750
5050
13,650
.....
Net Acres
J
1500 1 ....
850
6000
750 1 """ 1000
200
3000
1500 1 -400
1000
400 1 -500
1000
800
800 1 -2000
1000
4500 1 loolili
1000
150
28,350 -
-
lli!l!i
Appendixl
Procedures for Plan Modification
and Amendment
____ ,,.._,.,_~ L """'"""""''""'"'''''""'~ ~~~o "-~----~,.~~-"'-~-&±:!mi---·-~,---------
-
~-
r~xrNAM~: Appena1x1 lRJ~: u~
PLAN MODIFICATION
APPENDIX 1
PROCEDURES FOR PLAN MODIFICATION
AND EXCEPTIONS TO ITS PROVISIONS
The land use designations, the policies, the implementation actions, and
the management guidelines of this plan may be changed if conditions war-
rant. The pl an wi 11 be updated periodi cally as new data and new techno-
logies become available and as changing social and economie conditions
place different demands on public lands. The! Department of Natural
Resources will review proposed modifications of the plan.
A. Periodic Review
An interagency planning te am, 1 ed by the Division of Land and Water
Management, will coordinate periodic revit~w of this plan at the
request of the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources.
The pl an revi ew will incl ude meetings wi th ëtll interested groups and
the general public.
B. Amendments
The plan may be amended. An amendment adds to or modifies the basic
intent of the plan. Changes to the planned uses, policies, guide-
lines or certain implementation actions constitute amendments. A
proposal to change an agricultural area to residenti al use, or a
proposal to sell 1 and up to the river 1 s edge where a guidel ine
requires that a buffer be retained in public ownership are examples
of changes requiring amendment. Amendments require public notice
and public hearings. They must be approved by the Commissioner.
Management plans developed by the Division Olf Land and Water Manage-
ment may recommend amendments to the pl an. Amendments may be
proposed by agencies, municipalities, or members of the public.
Requests. for amendments are submitted to the~ Fairbanks office of the
Di vi sion of Land and Water Management, Al as ka Department of Natural
Resources.
C. Miner Changes
A miner change is one which does not modHy or add ta the basic
interit of th.e plan. Minor changes may be necessary for clarifica-
tion, con si stency, or to facil itate imp1 ementation of the pl an.
Mi nor changes do not require pub1 ic review. Mi nor changes may be
proposed by agencies, municipalities, or members of the public.
Requests for minor changes are submitted ta the Fairbanks office of
the Di vi sion of Land and Water Management, Alaska Department of
Natural Resources.
Al·l
TEXTNAME: Appendixi {R)P: 03
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS -DNR PROCEDURES
Exceptions to the provisions of the plan may be made without modification
of the plan. Special exceptions shall occur only when complying with the
1
U'
--
plan is excessively difficult or impractical and an alternative procedure ~
can be implemented which adheres to the purposes and spirit of the plan.
The Department of Natural Resources may make a special exception in the
implementation of the plan through the following procedures:
A. The District Manager of the Division of Land and Water Management
sha11 prepare a finding which requires a special exception. This ~~
shall include:
1. The extenuating conditions which require a special exception.
2. The alternative course of action to be followed.
3. How the intent of the plan will be met by the alternative.
B. Agencies having responsibility for land uses with primary or second-
ary designations in the affected area will be given an opportunity
to review the findings. In the event of di sagreement with the
District Manager•s decision, the decision may be appealed to the
Oirector of the Division of Land and Water Management, and the
-
Director's decision may be appealed to the Commissioner. If war-ll:l;i!l
ranted by the degree of controversy, the Coi11Tiissioner will hold a
public hearing before makin~ her or his decision.
......;
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
A1·2
0 3 6 9
SCALE IN MILES
1984
12
1-W. Fairbanks North
Star Borough-West
Land Use Designation
MAN AGE MENT UNIT SURUN IT PRIMA RY li SES SECON DARY USES
A. Nenana Ridge West A-l Habitat
Forestry
Recreat i on
A-2 Sett l ement Fores t ry
Recreation
Hab i tat
B. Goldstream Creek B-1 Habitat Forestry
Recreation
B-2 Se tt l ement Habitat
Recrea t ion
B-3 Agricu lture Habitat
lmpro ved pasture
grazing
Rec reation
c. Ester nome C-l Recreation Forestry
Habitat
Il . Al der Creek D-l Sett l eme nt Forestry
D-2 Resource Manag e ment
Forestry
Habitat
Re c reation
ll-3 Recreation
(too sma l l to map at this sca l e )
MANAGE MENT UN IT
E. Chatanika River
Corridor
F. North Slope of
Murp hy Dome
G. Our Creek
H. Upper Go l ds tream
I. Vault Creek
J. Cl ea ry Summi t/
Ped ro Oome
K. J uniper Creek
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8 . Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
SURUNIT PRIMARY li SES SECONOARY USES
E-1 Recreation
Hab i tat
(Proposed State
Recreation Ri ve r)
E-2 Sett lement Recreation
Forestry
Habitat
E-3 Fo r estry Recreation
Habitat
F-1 Hab i tat
Recreation
F-2 Sett l eme nt Habitat
Recr e ation
G-1 Settlement Recreation
G-2 Recreation Forestry
H-1 Sett 1 ement Rec r eation
H-2 Recreation
Habitat
I -1 Recrea t ion
Habitat
J -1 Sett l eme nt Habitat
Recreation
J -2 Habitat Forestry
Rec r eat ion
K-1 Habitat
K-2 Reso ur ce Management
Habitat
Minera l s
Sett l E'ment
TANANA BASIN
ARFAPIAN
MANAG EMENT WNIT SURUNIT PRIMARY liSES SECO NDAR Y USES
L. Be 11 e Creeek L-1 Resource Mana geMen t
Habitat
Forest ry
L-2 Settlement
M. Caribou (Creek M Watershed Forestry
Recreation
Habi tat
N. Upper Wal sh ington N-1 Resource Mana gement
Creek< Habitat
Mi nerals
N-2 Habitat
o. Pipe 1 i nee 0-1 Settlement Habitat
0-2 Resource Mana gement
Rec re at ion
Habitat
Min e ra ls
0-3 Habitat Recreat ion
Forestry
P. Tata l in1a Rive r P-1 Settlement Habitat
Agriculture lmproved past ure
grazing
P-2 Habitat
Q. Tanana ~Rive r Q-1 Habit at Recreation
(islands whi ch are
too small to ma p
at th i s sca l e)
Q-2 Ag ri c ulture !mproved pasture
gra z i ng
Habitat
~ State Forest
Non-State
1-E. Fairbanks North
Star Borough-East
Land Use Designation
MANAGEMENT UNIT SIJBUNIT PRIHARY USES SECONOARY USES
A. Salcha-Goodpaster A-1 Habitat Forestry
Uplands
B. Salcha River B-1 Habitat
Recreation Forestry
B-2 Habitat
Recreation
c. Upper Chena River
Highlands C-1 Habitat
D. Steese Hwy. to 0-1 Habitat
Chena Hot Springs Rd. Recreation
D-2 Recreation (sites too small to
map at this scale)
D-3 Recreation
ffabftat
D-4 Settlement Recreation
Habitat
E. Middle Fork
of the Chena R. E-1 Habitat
0
~ State Forest
Non-State
6 12 18
SCALE IN MILES
1984
24
TANANA BASIN
AREAPIAN
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Aiaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
2. Lower Tanana
Land Use Designation
MANAGEMENT UNIT SU8UNIT
A. Upper Chltanana A-1
8. Lower Ta nana
Rher Corridor
C. Flsh Lake
0. Eu reka-Tofty
E. Elephant mn.
F. Tolovana Hot
Springs Oome
G. Tolovana North
H. Mlnto Flats
!. Wet lands Sou th
of Ml nto F lats
A-2
A-3
8-1
8-2
8-3
C-1
0-1
0-2
o-3
E-1
E-2
E-3
F-1
F-2
G-1
H-1
l-1
J . Lower Goldstrea,. J-1
J-2
J-3
J-4
PRIKARY USES SECONOARY USES
Recreat 1 on
Resource Management
Agr1culture
Resource Management
Forestry
Sett lement
Resource Management
Agnculture
Habitat
Habitat Recreation
Forestry
Sett lement Habitat
Habitat
Resource Management
Agriculture
Ml nerals
Habitat
~êH lêrlii!Rt
Habitat
Recreation
Sett leme nt
Recreation
Forestry
Forestry
Habl tat
Recreat 1 on
Recreation Habitat
Resource Management
Agr>culture
Habitat
Mlnerals
Hab! tat Recreation
Forestry
Habitat
Habitat
Recreation
Habitat
Settlement
Habitat
Agriculture
Recreat lon
Recrea tl on
Habitat
Recreation
Recreatl on
lmproved pasture
grazlng
Habitat
MANAGEMENT UNIT SUBUNIT
K. Lower Goldstream K-1
L. West Fork
To lova na
H. L1 vengood
N. Upper Tolovana
O. Tatalina River
K-2
K-3
K-4
K-5
K-6
L-1
L-2
L-3
L-4
M-1
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-5
M-6
M-7
N-1
N-2
0-1
PRIKARY USES
Agriculture
Habitat
Resource Management
Agriculture
Habl tat
Resource Management
Habitat
Recrea t 1 on
SECONOARY USES
lmproved pasture
graz! ng
Forestry
Settlement Habitat
Resource Management
Recreat 1 on
Habitat
Forestry
Agriculture lmproved pasture
graz i ng
Resource Management
Agriculture
Habitat
Minera ls
Forestry
Agriculture
Resource Management
Agr1culture
Minerais
Recreation
Habitat
lmproved pastu re
graz i ng
Hab! tat Recrea ti on
Forestry
Habitat
Recreation
Resource Management
Habitat
Forestry
Recreation
Mi nera 1 s
Settl ement
Forestry
Resource Management
Habitat
Resource Management
Agr>cu lture
Habitat
Minerais
Habitat
Habitat
Recreation
Habitat
Recreation
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
f"l7l ~ State Forest
Non-State
0 6 12
TANANA BASIN
AREAPIAN
18 24
SCALE IN MILES
1984
6 12 18
SCALE IN MILES
1984
5.
24
Alaska Range West
Land Use Designation
MANAGEMEN T UNIT SU BU NIT PRIMARY US ES SECONDARY USES
A. Upper Yane r t Fork A-l Habitat Recreation
B. Mountains Southwest
of Upper Yood Rive r B-1 Habitat Recreation
c. North Slope of
Alaska Range C-l Ha bi t at Recreati on
C-2 Ha bitat
D. Lower Dry Creek/
Ja p a n Hi l l s D-l Settlement Ha bitat
Recre a t i on
D-2 Ha bitat
E. Ta tlan i ka Fl ats E-l Ha bitat
--~
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4 . Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7 . Upper Tanana
8 . Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan
TANANA BASIN
AREAPIAN
4. Parks
Land Use Designation
MANAGEMENT UNIT ~ PR !MARY USES SE CONIJARY USES
A. Jack Ri ver A-l Habi t a t
B. Re i ndeer Hi l l s B-1 Ha bitat
Recreation
c. Ya ne r t Ri ve r C-l Settlement Hab itat
Recreation
C-2 Recre ation Forestry
Habit at
o. Us ibe 11 i 0-1 Hab i tat Recreat i on
Fores t r y
0-2 Sett l ement Recreation
Forest ry
Habitat
0-3 Rec r ea tion
(proposed State
Rec r eat ion Riv er)
Habitat
E. Stamped e frai 1 E-l Recreat i on
Habitat
F. Parks Hi ghway F-1 Sett lement Hab itat
Forestry
Recreat 1 on
F-2 Hab i tat
Recr eation Forestr y
F-3 Agricu l t u re Hab i tat
Recreation
Forest ry
l mproved past ure
grazi ng
G. Upp e r Te klanik a G-1 Res ource Management
East Agr 1 cu 1 ture
Forestry
Hab it at
G-2 Hab ita t Fores try
H. Eas t Teklanika H-l Se tt leme nt Habitat
Rec r eation
Forestry
H-2 Resource Manageme nt
Hab 1 tat
H-3 Res ource Mana 9:ement
Agncu ltu re
Habita t
Forestry
Mine r a i s
1. Tokl anika Delta 1-1 Sett leme nt Habitat
Fores try
Recrea tion
1-2 Hab itat
J . Seventeen Hi 1 e J -1 Hab itat
Slough Recreati on
Forestry
J -2 Se tt 1 eme nt Habitat
Forestry
Recreation
J-3 Agriculture Hab it at
Forestry
Recreat to n
J -4 Reso urce Managemen t
Ag ri cu 1 t ure
Fore stry
Habitat
K. Nenana Ridg e K-1 Re crea t ion
Forestry Se tt l eme nt
K-2 Se tt 1 ement Forestry
Recreation
-. . .. -L-i U .. k ifo l> ... L. l ota la n i ka Flat s Habltat
Recreation
H. Rex Dom e to
Liberty Bell Min e M-l Habitat Recreation
~ State Forest
Non-State
6.
TANANA BASIN
AREAPIAN
Alaska Range East
Land Use Designation
MANAGEMENT UNIT SU BU NIT PRIHARY USES SECONilARY USES
A.
B.
e.
Johnson Glacier A-1 Habitat
Fielding Lake B-1 Habitat
Recreation
Nërtli s16fl~ at C=l H~!Jit~t
the Alaska Range
0
C-2 Recreation
Habitat
l17l ~ State Forest
Non-State
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Sale ha Area Plan
6 12 18
SCALE IN MILES
1984
24
-··-~-----
~ ~ = ~ ·!; -""
ui ~ = -""
i~ -.
0 6 12 18
SCALE IN MILES
1984
24
TANANA BASIN
AREAPIAN
8. Goodpaster
Land Use Designation
MANAGEMENT UNIT SUBUNIT PRIMARY USES SECONOARY USES
A. He a ly Ri ve r A-1 Forestry Recr eation
Habitat
B. Watersh ed B-1 Sett leme nt Recreation
Habita t
B-2 Habitat Forestry
recreation
c. Shaw Cr eek Flats C-1 Habi t at
~ State Forest
Non-State
1. Fairbanks North Star Borough
2. Lower Tanana
3. Kantishna
4. Parks
5. Alaska Range West
6. Alaska Range East
7. Upper Tanana
8. Goodpaster
9. Delta-Salcha Area Plan