HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA2788draft
general management plan/environmental assessment
land protection plan
wilderness suitability review
march 1985
DENALI
NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE I ALASKA
Comments will be accepted until ^UL 1 D Ic^OO.
and should be sent to
Regional Director
Alaska Regional Office
National Park Service
2525 Gambell Street,Room 107
Anchorage,AK 99503-2892
For further information on this document,contact
Robert Cunningham,Superintendent
Box 9
Denali National Park,AK 99755
(907)683-2294
Linda Nebel
Alaska Regional Office
2525 Gambell Street,Room 107
Anchorage,AK 99503-2892
(907)271-4366
united states department of the interior /national park service
ANILCA REQUIREMENTS
Section 1301 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA:PL 96-487)requires the preparation of
conservation and management plans for each unit of the national park system established or enlarged by ANILCA.These
plans are to describe programs and methods for managing resources,proposed development for visitor services and
facilities,proposed access and circulation routes and transportation facilities,programs and methods for protecting the
culture of local residents,plans for acquiring land or modifying boundaries,methods for ensuring that uses of private lands
are compatible with the purposes of the unit,and opportunities for mutually beneficial cooperation with other regional
landowners.
^
NPS PLANNING DOCUMENTS
The National Park Service planning process for each park (preserve,monument,or other unit of the system)involves a
number of stages,progressing from the formulation of broad objectives,through decisions about what general management
direction should be followed to achieve the objectives,to formulation of detailed actions for implementing specific
components of the general management plan.
The general management plan addresses topics of resource management,visitor use,
park operations,and development in general terms.The goal of this plan is to
establish a consensus among the National Park Service and interested agencies,
groups,and individuals about the types and levels of visitor use,development,and
resource protection that will occur.These decisions are based on the purpose of the
park,its significant values,the activities occurring there now,and the resolution of
any major issues surrounding possible land use conflicts within and adjacent to the
park.The following kinds of detailed action plans are prepared concurrently with or
after completion of the general management plan.
Land protection plans
present approaches to
private or other
non-NPS lands within
the boundaries of NPS
units,in order to
attempt to have these
lands managed in as
compatible a manner as
possible with the
planned management
objectives of the park
unit.
Resource management
plans identify the
actions that will be
taken to preserve and
protect natural and
cultural resources.
Where appropriate,one
component of the
environment {for
example,fire
management plan,river
man agement plan,
historic structure plan)
may be further
developed into an
independent plan that
becomes a part of the
resource management
plan.
Development concept
plans establish basic
types and sizes of
facilities for specific
locations.
Inter pret ive plans
describe the themes and
media that will be used
to interpret the park's
significant resources.
Wilderness suitability
reviews determine
which lands are suitable
for inclusion in the
national wilderness
preservation system.
Depending largely on the complexity of individual planning efforts,action plans may or may not be prepared
simultaneously with the general management plan.If they are prepared after the general plan,the NPS public involvement
and cooperative planning efforts are continued until all of the implementation plans are completed.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
Document Organization 2
Planning Issues and Management Concerns
PART ONE:PLANS
GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 9
Introduction 9
Proposed Management Zoning 9
Visitor Use and General Development 10
North-side Proposals 10
South-side Proposals 19
Access 25
Interpretation 26
Development Considerations 26
Natural Resources 28
Wildlife Management 29
Mineral Management 33
Fire Management 34
Backcountry Management 35
Site Restoration 35
Air Quality Management 36
Cultural Resources 36
Archeological Sites 38
Historic Sites 38
Contemporary Native American Concerns 39
Park Operations 39
LAND PROTECTION PLAN 41
Summary 41
Introduction 42
Purpose of the Park and Resources to be Protected 43
Landownership and Uses 45
Protection Alternatives 56
Recommendations 63
Compliance Considerations 67
WILDERNESS SUITABILITY REVIEW 69
PART TWO:ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
INTRODUCTION 75
ALTERNATIVES 76
Alternative A 76
Alternative B 77
III
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 80
Alternative A 80
Impacts on Moose,Caribou,Bear,Dall Sheep,and Wolf 80
Impacts on Vegetation 85
Impacts on Fish 87
r-Impacts on Water Quality 88
Impacts on Air Quality 89
Impacts on Archeological and Historic Resources 89
Impacts on Subsistence Use 90
Impacts on Park Visitors and Regional Tourism 9T
Impacts on Scenic Quality 93
Impacts on Wilderness Values 93
Impacts on Local Economy and Employment 94
Alternative B 95
Introduction 95
Impacts on Moose,Caribou,Bear,Dall Sheep,and Wolf 96
Impacts on Vegetation 98
-Impacts on Water Quality 99
Impacts on Air Quality 100
Impacts on Archeological and Historic Resources 100
Impacts on Subsistence Use 100
Impacts on Park Visitors and Regional Tourism 101
Impacts on Scenic Quality 102
Impacts on Wilderness Values 102
Impacts on Local Economy and Employment 102
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 103
Natural Environment 103
Physiography and Geology 103
Mineral Resources and Mining 105
-Hydrology 106
Climate 109
Soils 110
Vegetation 111
Wildlife 112
Cultural Environment 116
Archeology and Ethnography 119
History 120
Significant Cultural Resources 121
Existing Visitor Use 122
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 125
APPENDIXES
F:
G:
The Mandate for Denali 127
Federal Regulations 129
Management Objectives 139
Preliminary Cost Estimates 143
Memorandum of Understanding between the National Park Service,
the Alaska Department of Natural Resources,and the Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities 146
Subsistence Evaluation (Compliance with Section 810 of ANILCA)
Memorandum of Understanding between the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game and the National Park Service 155
151
IV
H:Land Acquisition Authority 160
I:Specific Land Protection Recommendations 162
J:Endangered Species Act Compliance 180
BIBLIOGRAPHY 183
LIST OF PREPARERS 187
TABLES
1.Proposed Changes in Traffic Levels 13
2.Land Status 45
3.Changes in Development,1983 Development Concept Plan 76
4.Numbers and Kinds of Vehicles Using the North Park Road Corridor,
1981-1984 92
5.Climatological Data 109
6.Annual Visitation,1922-1984 123
7.Seasonal Use Patterns,1980 124
ILLUSTRATIONS
Region 5
Proposed Management Zoning 11
Road Corridor 17
South Side Landscape Features 23
Land Status 47
Regional Influences 51
Land Protection 65
Wilderness Suitability 71
Geology 107
Vegetation 113
Wildlife Habitats 117
INTRODUCTION
By Alaskan standards Denali is an unusual national park.First,it is an
old park,having been established in 1917,and unlike many of the newer
Alaskan parks it has a management tradition,existing development,and
established patterns of visitor use.Second,Denali lies between the
state's two major population centers.Anchorage and Fairbanks,from
which it is accessible by private automobile,tour bus,railroad,and
airplane.And finally,Denali contains resources of international
significance--the highest mountain on the North American continent and
the largest continuously protected ecosystem in the world.For this
reason it has gained international recognition through its designation as a
biosphere reserve under the Man and the Biosphere program of the
United Nations.Because it is an established,well-known park with
relatively easy access and outstanding features,Denali has attracted large
numbers of visitors in the past,and indications are that it will continue
to do so in the future.
In 1980 Denali National Park was expanded by the Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act (PL 96-487,hereafter cited as ANILCA).
Previously confined to the north side of the McKinley massif,the park
now also encompasses the south side,which has considerably different
landscape features and resource values from the north side and offers
additional opportunities for visitor use.
Today Denali is confronted with a serious threat of overuse along the
park road corridor.A recent study (NPS,Singer and Beattie 1984)
demonstrated some disruption to wildlife populations caused by increasing
visitor traffic along the park road,indicating that one of the principal
visitor experiences,wildlife viewing,may be in jeopardy.The current
experience is unique because Denali is the only place in the national park
system where visitors can consistently expect to see caribou,Dall sheep,
moose,and bears--the "big four"of Alaskan wildlife--in a single day of
travel.Park managers are challenged to ensure the long-range
preservation of Denali's remarkable wildlife viewing opportunities while at
the same time meeting the expectations of this generation of visitors.
The current planning effort focuses on visitor use of the park and
preserve:how and where increasing levels of use can be accommodated,
opportunities for enhancing the visitor experience,and what actions are
required to ensure that use does not unacceptably degrade Denali's
natural and cultural values.
DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION
This document contains an integrated set of proposals and environmental
analysis information for Denali National Park and Preserve,in two parts.
Part one,titled "Plans,"contains various plans prepared to meet the
requirements set forth in ANILCA and other legislation and policies,as
follows:
A "General Management Plan"is presented in compliance with section
1301 of ANILCA and section 604 of the National Parks and Recreation
Act.
A "Land Protection Plan"is presented in compliance with section 1301
of ANILCA and the Department of the Interior policy on land
protection.
A "Wilderness Suitability Review"is presented in compliance with
section 1317(a)of ANILCA and sections 3(c)and (d)of the
Wilderness Act,as amended.
Part two of this document,titled "Environmental Assessment,"contains a
description of the natural,cultural,and socioeconomic environments that
will be affected by this planning effort,and an analysis of the
alternatives that were considered during the preparation of the plans.
PLANNING ISSUES AND MANAGEMENT CONCERNS
The following issues are addressed by the plans included in this
document.
Visitor use and general development :Until now nearly all visitors to
Denali have been confined to the road corridor that extends from
Riley Creek to Kantishna.However,there is growing evidence that
escalating use along the road has begun to disrupt the natural
behavior and movements of wildlife (NPS,Singer and Beattie 1984).
Also,the campgrounds,interpretive facilities,utilities,and the
roadway itself are in need of rehabilitation to safely accommodate
even the existing levels of use--and another increase in visitation of
the magnitude of what occurred over the past decade (a 144 percent
increase)could not be accommodated without major new development.
For several years federal and state planners have been exploring
opportunities to cooperate with private enterprise to develop a new
visitor service and activity center on state park lands south of
Mount McKinley.The expansion of Denali National Park by ANILCA
in 1980 resulted in a shared boundary between the national park and
Denali State Park,immediately to the south,giving new impetus to
the concept of cooperative management to support visitor use.The
shift in attention from already developed areas on the north side of
Denali National Park to state and national park lands on the south
side of the Alaska Range is due in part to the outstanding potential
of these areas for interpreting Mount McKinley and associated
geologic features.Another reason that south-side development is
attractive is that it promises to relieve some of the problems
associated with increasing use of the existing park road corridor.
The issues of controlling use on the north side of Denali and
creating a new center for visitor activities on the south side are
addressed in the visitor use and general development section of the
"General Management Plan."
Natural resource management :If the ecological integrity of the park
and preserve is to be maintained,natural processes must be allowed
to prevail in shaping the environment.Natural processes could
potentially be disrupted by visitor activities and associated
development or by mining operations.Management of these activities
to protect resource values is addressed in the natural resource
section of in the "General Management Plan."Because too little is
known about natural processes to evaluate with certainty at what
point human activities become disruptive influences,the plan
includes a program of research,analysis,and monitoring to provide
managers with the requisite understanding of Denali's complex
environment.This basic management strategy is consistent with the
park's current "Resources Management Plan,"which is a separate,
more detailed document that is updated annually to reflect specific
management needs and priorities.
Cultural resource management :All significant cultural resources
must be identified,evaluated,and protected under federal and state
laws.The cultural resource section of the "General Management
Plan"describes the long-range strategy for carrying out this
mandate.
Land protection :The eventual disposition and use of nonfederal
lands within and adjacent to Denali remains a concern to park
management.The "Land Protection Plan"identifies the techniques
available to ensure the long-term protection of the park and
preserve and describes the specific actions the National Park Service
intends to pursue in the immediate future.The proposed
management of mineral development operations on patented and valid
unpatented claims is discussed in both the "Land Protection Plan"
and the natural resource section of the "General Management Plan."
Wilderness suitability :The National Park Service has conducted a
preliminary evaluation of all federal lands within Denali National Park
and Preserve to determine their suitability for inclusion in the
national wilderness preservation system.Factors such as
landownership,existing uses,and potential development were
considered in determining wilderness suitability.This evaluation is
described in the "Wilderness Suitability Review."
A great deal of specific guidance for the future management of the park
and preserve--particularly as it relates to established traditional uses by
local residents--is provided by ANILCA and by the federal regulations for
public use of Alaskan parks.These provisions,which are an integral
part of the management of Denali National Park and Preserve,are not
repeated in the "General Management Plan"section of this document;
however,major provisions of ANILCA are summarized for reference in
appendix A,and the federal regulations are reprinted for reference in
appendix B.Also included,in appendix C,are the management
objectives for the park,which provide broad direction for day-to-day
park management.
Once approved,the general management plan is intended to serve as a
management guide for approximately ten years.The land protection plan
will be reviewed and revised if necessary every two years.The
wilderness suitability review will form the basis for a formal wilderness
recommendation to the Congress that will be submitted by 1987.
rairoanKS
DENALI NATIONAL PARK
AND PRESERVE
Glennallen-
Palmer
Anchorage-
Kenai
LAKE CLARK
NATIONAL PARK
AND PRESERVE ,^'
0^
Hope-
i
^
ii
Valdez^
Whitt
Homer-
Seldovia
—
KATMAI
NATIONAL PARK
AND PRESERVE
Kodiak
Sewar
KENAI FJORDS
NATIONAL PARK
AND PRESERVE
leo|4V>.
REGION
Denali National Park and Preserve
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
^C&^M
PART ONE:PLANS
GENERAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
INTRODUCTION
Two alternatives for accommodating visitor use were analyzed during the
development of this plan:(A)continue present management with no
south-side development,and (B)develop the south side and reduce
private vehicle use and camping along the north road corridor.The
impacts of both alternatives are addressed in the "Environmental
Assessment"section of this document.Alternative B has been selected as
the preferred alternative and is presented here as the proposal for the
general management plan.
PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ZONING
As a basis for all subsequent land use planning,zoning broadly
delineates the appropriate management strategies for various lands,based
on their resource characteristics and how they can best be used to
achieve the park's purpose and objectives.Areas of Denali will be placed
in four management zones--natural ,historic,park development,and
special use--as shown on the Management Zoning map.The management
emphasis for each zone is described below.
Natural Zone .Lands and waters in this zone are managed for the
conservation of natural resources and processes and for the
accommodation of uses that do not adversely affect resources.Because of
the relatively pristine nature of the park,more than 97 percent of the
total acreage is in this zone.The natural zone has been subdivided into
two subzones:the wilderness subzone and the outstanding natural
feature subzone.The wilderness subzone comprises those lands either
designated as wilderness or determined suitable for designation as
wilderness.These lands will be managed to ensure that natural processes
prevail.Those uses compatible with the 1964 Wilderness Act and special
uses allowed by ANILCA will be permitted in this subzone.(See the
"Wilderness Suitability Review"section of this document for a more
detailed discussion of wilderness areas and allowable activities.)The
outstanding natural feature subzone includes the Ruth Glacier and
associated drainages.The purpose of this subzone is to promote public
appreciation and interpretation of the unique geologic features of this
area of the park.Visitor activities that are compatible with this purpose
will be encouraged in this subzone.
Historic Zone .Lands in this zone are managed primarily to preserve
cultural resources.In Denali this zone includes all the sites and
structures that are listed on or are eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places.Appropriate uses in this zone include visitor appreciation
and study of cultural features and adaptive use of historic structures for
other park purposes.Lands qualifying for the historic zone are not
represented on the zoning map because of their small scale.For a
description of these properties,refer to the cultural resource description
in part two of this document.
Park Development Zone .Lands in this zone are managed to accommodate
major development and intensive use.In Denali this zone includes the
road corridor and all lands where major facilities exist.
Special Use Zone .Lands in this zone are owned or used by parties
other than the National Park Service.In Denali this zone includes
private properties and mining claims.
VISITOR USE AND GENERAL DEVELOPMENT
In 1972,when the George Parks Highway opened,visitor use at Denali
totaled 88,615.Over the next 12 years visitor use grew at an average
rate of 25,000 visitor days per year to a total of 394,426 visits in 1984.
The escalating demands on Denali's resources,coupled with the need to
provide a visitor experience equal to the resources,is the single most
critical problem facing park managers.The solution suggested by this
plan is to expand recreational opportunities on the south side of Denali,
then to modify use on the north to protect resource values.Based on
current trends it is expected that the demand for use of Denali will
increase by another 250,000 people per year by the end of the 10-year
planning period.This amount of additional demand cannot be
accommodated in the existing park road corridor without a significant
decline in the visible wildlife,but it can be accommodated if the south
side is developed as an alternative destination for visitors.
The southern expansion of Denali National Park to the boundary of
adjoining Denali State Park has created an opportunity to add a new
dimension to the Denali experience.The established uses of the "old
park"will continue while work is undertaken to develop Denali State Park
and the south side of Denali National Park for expanded and diversified
visitor use.Together the north and south sides will offer a large range
of visitor experiences geared to the full complement of Denali's
outstanding natural resources.Developed in this way,the parks should
be able to meet visitor demands for many years.
North-side Proposals
During the 70 years of National Park Service stewardship at Denali,the
visiting public has been accommodated almost exclusively along the park
road corridor,where the principal experience has been viewing Mount
McKinley and the park's fascinating wildlife.Within the past 15 years,
however,since the completion of the George Parks Highway and the
associated dramatic increase in visits to Denali,the National Park Service
has become aware that increasing traffic has been detrimental to
opportunities for viewing wildlife along the park road corridor.
In 1972,the year the Parks Highway opened,a mandatory public
transportation system was instituted,and only visitors with overnight or
other special use permits were allowed to drive their cars beyond Savage
River.Because of significant increases in visitor use over the next
decade,by 1981 the level of bus and permitted private vehicle traffic had
increased 50 percent and was again recognized as a threat to wildlife
10
•PETQ-^eWlLLE
:.'J \\
0.\\-TAH'^ETM*^
7>\t
NATURAL ZONE
97 5%OF THE PARK AND PRESERVE
I WILDERNESS SUBZONE
II
OUTSTANDING NATURAL FEATURE SUBZONE
PARK DEVELOPMENT ZONE
•J-7%OF THE PARK AND PRESERVE
AIRSTRIP
GLACIER
o
PROPOSED
MANAGEMENT
ZONING
«C(FBp.««3
viewing.A special wildlife study undertaken that year and completed in
March 1984 concluded that the traffic increase between 1974 and 1981 had
not had a significant effect on overall populations in the area,but that it
had caused many moose and bears to avoid using the road corridor.In
addition to the demonstrated effect of reducing the number of moose and
bears that utilize habitat in the immediate vicinity of the road,there is
concern that increasing traffic might eventually disrupt the movements of
migrating herds if the spacing between vehicles becomes too short.
In an effort to allow as many people as possible to view all of the big
four Alaskan wildlife in their natural habitat,the National Park Service
will make additional use of the shuttle bus system and allow fewer private
vehicles on the park road.It has been demonstrated that private vehicle
use causes the greatest amount of avoidance behavior on the part of
wildlife because the occupants of private vehicles can stop at will and
approach the animals on foot,while visitors riding shuttle buses are not
allowed to leave the vehicles in areas of critical wildlife habitat (NPS
Singer and Beattie 1984).Shuttle buses also have the obvious advantage
of carrying 40 people per vehicle,compared to the average carload of
three people per vehicle.As a first step in implementing this concept
the National Park Service will continue to start the operation of the
shuttle bus system as soon as the road opens and will extend it into the
fall for as long as visitor use remains high.Initially,until the
south-side development is operational,all traffic on the park road will be
held to within plus or minus 15 percent of the 1984 levels.A 15 percent
daily variance will allow the shuttle and tour bus service to be tailored
more closely to daily fluctuations in demand.Once the proposals for the
south side of Denali are implemented,private vehicle traffic on the park
road will be reduced by about 45 percent,causing an overall reduction of
23 percent in road traffic.Bus traffic can then be increased by 20
percent,leaving a net reduction of 17 percent in total vehicle traffic (see
table 1).As a result of these actions,up to 24,000 additional visitors
per year can be accommodated with less disturbance to wildlife behavior.
Table 1:Proposed Changes in Traffic Levels
Seasonal Use
At Full Plan Net
1984 Implementation Change
Tour and shuttle buses 4,008 4,810 +20%
Private vehicles 6,245 3,435 -45%
NPS vehicles 1,702 1,702 0_
Total traffic 11,955 9,947 -17%
The reduction in private vehicle traffic will be accomplished by decreasing
the vehicle use associated with camping.The campgrounds at Sanctuary,
Igloo,and Teklanika will be phased out once replacement campgrounds are
available on the south side of Denali.Campgrounds will be retained at
their existing sizes at Riley Creek,Savage River,and Wonder Lake.The
13
reduction in campsite vehicle permits will reduce the number of private
vehicles that can stop at will near wildlife.Closing some campgrounds
will have the further advantage of reducing the potential for human/bear
encounters in an area that already has a high incidence of problems.
Based on past trends,the proposed 20 percent increase in bus service
will not be enough to accommodate all of the demand;however,visitors
who cannot be accommodated on the north side of the park can be
accommodated on the south side once the proposal for south-side
development is implemented.In fact,development of the south side of
Denali as an alternative visitor destination is expected to provide
additional recreational opportunities for the visitors to Denali,resulting in
a leveling off of demand for transportation services and accommodations in
the northern part of the park.
The proposal to reduce the number of campsites in the road corridor
constitutes a revision of the 1983 Development Concept Plan to reflect the
wildlife data published in Singer and Beattie's 1984 report.The elements
of the DCP that are endorsed by this plan include the rehabilitation of
the road surface,upgrading of utility systems,renovation of existing
structures,and development of new interpretive facilities.In addition,
construction of a new $3.7 million visitor access center is underway and
will be completed in the spring of 1987,and the reconstruction of the
Denali National Park Hotel,a $14 million construction project,is scheduled
to begin in 1987.All of the specific development projects are listed on
the North-Side Proposals chart.Together these actions will improve
health and safety conditions,provide better information and
interpretation,and help to confine environmental impacts to the most
suitable locations.The intent of these actions is to reinforce existing
conditions.No action is intended to significantly change the types or
levels of visitor use.The preliminary cost estimates for these projects
are listed in appendix D.
Any further development of commercial visitor facilities on private
properties in the Kantishna mining district will be considered incompatible
with the planned purposes of the park because of the need to limit
vehicle use in this portion of the park.The National Park Service is
concerned that commercial development would increase the demand for
vehicle use and proposes to avoid it^by acquiring the surface estates to
patented mining claims.This issue is discussed in greater detail in the
"Land Protection Plan"section of this document.
15
NORTH-SIDE PROPOSALS
A.Riley Creek/Park Entrance -Construct new visitor access center along the park
road;relocate campground entry;construct central camper services building (shower,
laundry,store,gas,equipment rental)and new hostel
B.Hotel/Depot Area -Construct new hotel;provide new coffee shop,employee dining
room,bus maintenance shop,employee housing;improve information/orientation services
and exhibits;construct new service road and loop drive;expand hotel parking;
landscape hotel grounds and depot parking area;relocate gas station/store;convert
Morino campground to picnic area;close hostel and replace at Riley Creek
C.Park Headquarters/C-Camp -Renovate and expand the permanent and seasonal
housing;develop seasonal housing and trailer sites;construct bunkhouse;consolidate
maintenance/office facilities;construct administration building annex;separate
maintenance/administration functions from housing
D.Taiga Wayside -Provide major exhibit area,seating,vehicle turnaround
E.Savage River Campground -Rehabilitate sites;construct bus stop shelter with
orientation exhibits
F.Primrose Ridge Wayside -Provide orientation and interpretive exhibits,possibly
with a shelter,and short loop trail
G.Sanctuary Campground -Remove campground and restore sites to natural
conditions
H.Teklanika Campground -Remove campground and restore sites to natural
conditions
Teklanika Rest Stop -Provide comfort station,picnic tables
I.Igloo Canyon Campground -Remove campground and restore sites to natural
conditions
J.Polychrome Pass Wayside -Upgrade with comfort station and interpretive
exhibits/shelter;delineate parking and paths
K.Toklat -Improve and expand employee housing;separate maintenance and
housing;construct maintenance/storage shop,bunkhouse,sewer plant
Toklat Ranger Station -Rehabilitate structure;build adequate winter
storage/emergency supplies cache
L.Stony Hill Wayside -Provide interpretive exhibits,picnic shelter/comfort station,
short trail;reduce parking area
M.Eielson Visitor Center -Short-term:reduce parking area,pave,landscape;
long-term:replace structure with facility or enlarge and renovate existing structure
N.Wonder Lake Campground -Construct new campground adjacent to the existing
one;reduce roads and parking areas;surface the most erodible sections of the trail to
Mckinley River Bar;restore existing campground to natural conditions
O.Wonder Lake Ranger Station -Provide employee/bus driver residences,transient
bunkhouse,grounds rehabilitation
P.Kantishna Area -Encourage private owners to preserve historic artifacts;prevent
additional privately owned lodging by acquiring surface estates;develop NPS
maintenance facility
Parkwide Improvement Proposals -Restore park road to original design standard;retain
gravel surface;correct drainage;repair/replace bridges
Upgrade water/sewage treatment systems to current standards
Retain public shuttle bus system;continue wildlife tours;adjust shuttle schedule to
improve service (provide flexible service);provide comfortable shuttle buses if
possible;coordinate schedules with interpretive programs--more eastbound morning
buses and later buses partway into park and return,special buses for discovery hikes
Improve orientation/interpretive exhibits at entry points,campgrounds,waysides;
generally improve sign program,install road signs to key with text in brochures/guides
Provide food storage caches/cooking shelters at tent campgrounds,as needed
Provide short,formal trails and "harden"surfaces where resources are being damaged
or where extensive informal trails are developing
ROAD CORRIDOR
cy^TY^tU-
A RILEY CREEK/PARK ENTRANCE
B HOTEL/DEPOT AREA
C PARK HEADQUARTCnS/C-CAMP
D TAIGA WAYSIDE
E SAVAGE RIVER CAMPGROUND
F PRIMflOSE RIDGE WAYSIDE
G SANCTUARY CAMPGROUND
H TEKLANIKA CAMPGROUND/REST STOP
I IGLOO CANYON CAMPGROUND/WAYSIDE
J POLYCHROME PASS WAYSIDE
K TOKLAT
L STONY HILL WAYSIDEMEIELSONVISITORCENTER
N WONDER LAKE CAMPGROUND
O WONDER LAKE RANGER STATION
P KANTISMNA AREA
South-side Proposals
The south slope of the McKinley massif is conspicuously different from the
sheer north wall and the valley traversed by the existing park road.
The south slope receives a greater annual precipitation and spans a more
gradual elevation rise from the adjacent lowlands and,as a result,
contains a much more extended glacial system and a broader cross section
of dramatically sculptured landscapes.Some of the south-side valley
glaciers--the Yentna,Kahiltna,Tokositna,Ruth,and Eldridge--are among
the longest in the world,extending up to 45 miles from source to
terminus.The enlarged national park encompasses these glaciers and the
lower reaches of moraines and tundra.Adjacent Denali State Park,
established in 1970,now adjoins the expanded national park,creating
opportunities for cooperative management for visitor use.
Compared to the north side,with its sensitive wildlife values and fragile
tundra,the glaciated landscape on the south side offers more varied
opportunities for access and recreational use.Potential activities in the
state and national parks range from viewing the Alaska Range from the
George Parks Highway to the ultimate in American mountaineering
challenges--reaching the summit of Mount McKinley.Small aircraft can fly
up and land on the numerous glaciers.Hiking opportunities of varying
degrees of difficulty abound in the front range mountains (particularly
the Tokoshas),in the rolling tundra highlands of the Peters and Dutch
hills,and on Curry Ridge in the state park,where a 40-mile trail loop
already exists.River floating possibilities exist on the Tokositna and
Chulitna rivers.The broad,marshy Chulitna and Tokositna river
valleys,dotted with lakes and ponds,provide good opportunities for
viewing wildlife,notably moose and trumpeter swans.The views to the
Tokosha Mountains are superlative.In the winter and spring when the
marshy terrain is frozen,these valleys become vast cross-country skiing
and dogsledding grounds.Several residents of the Tokosha community
currently operate cross-country ski-touring businesses that utilize trails
and cabins in the area.
Many of the activities mentioned already occur on a modest level,but the
development of access and support services will make these activities
available to a wider cross section of visitors.This provision of
mountain-oriented recreational opportunities was legislated in the park's
expansion act.
Foremost in facilitating visitor use of the south side--especially for
national and international visitors--will be the development of a full range
of lodging and other visitor services and the provision of access to major
features,viewpoints,and activity areas.These major facilities on the
south side of Denali should be visually linked with the Ruth Glacier
because of the Ruth Glacier's wealth of spectacular features capable of
accommodating visitor use.With the Sheldon Amphitheater,Great Gorge,
Alder Point,Alder Lake,and the Moose's Tooth and other granitic
monoliths,the Ruth Glacier is superior to neighboring glaciers for the
purposes of providing a dramatic visitor experience.
The most striking vantage point for viewing Mount McKinley through the
corridor opened by the Ruth Glacier occurs on the south end of Curry
19
Ridge.Curry Ridge Is a tundra plateau that parallels the Alaska Range
for some 30 miles.From this elevated vantage point,1,000 feet above the
highway,the full sweep of the Alaska Range is revealed across the
forested Chulitna River valley.This dramatic viewpoint is the proposed
site for the visitor service and activity center.This site also offers the
advantage of being easily accessible from the George Parks Highway and
the Alaska Railroad.Alaskan residents and tourists could reach the area
in a 3-hour drive from Anchorage or a 5-hour drive from Fairbanks,or if
they wished to travel by train,they could arrange a round-trip in a
minimum of two days.
The final selection of a site for development will be made in cooperation
with the state of Alaska.At that time a second-phase analysis will be
undertaken to provide more detailed,site-specific information,including
further environmental studies,marketing projections,and design and
construction feasibility.The National Park Service and the state of
Alaska have signed a memorandum of understanding that establishes what
processes will be followed for cooperative planning for south-side
development (see appendix E).The Curry Ridge site,preferred by the
National Park Service,is part of Denali State Park,which is currently
managed as a primitive area with a single campground and a trail system.
Thus,the development of a visitor activity center as envisioned in this
plan will constitute a major change in the management of Denali State Park
as well as a new focus for use of Denali National Park.
Tokositna Glacier now appears impractical as a major development site.
The Tokositna Glacier in Denali National Park and the Peters and Dutch
hills in Denali State Park were originally assessed for the state's
Tokositna plan and reassessed for the Denali general management plan.
Several factors were considered,including the fact that development of an
activity center at Tokositna would require expensive road construction
and the area would not be accessible to the railroad.Furthermore,the
Peters Hills and Dutch Hills contain a variety of mixed land uses,
particularly mining activity,that might conflict with a large increase in
visitor use.
As shown on the South Side Landscape Features map,the particular
attributes of different areas on the south side of Denali can be used to
advantage to create a great variety of outstanding experiences for
visitors to choose from.For the foreseeable future,aircraft will be the
primary means of access to features within Denali National Park.Both
fixed-wing and helicopter access will be evaluated in future studies.
Most visitors'destinations will be in the vicinity of the Ruth Glacier,
which could be reached in a matter of minutes from an airstrip near
Curry Ridge.A system of trails and up to four mountain huts will be
developed in this part of the national park to support day and overnight
trips ranging from fly-in/fly-out excursions to wilderness treks.Aircraft
use will be managed through commercial use licenses to fit the capacity of
popular fly-in sites and to avoid disturbing the solitude of more remote
park destinations and private lands.
The visitor service and activity center within Denali State Park could be
supplemented by additional facilities along the George Parks Highway
provided by the private sector in concert with the recommendations made
20
RyrtLGLACIER
NATURAL CORRIDOR THROUGH AN IMMENSE GLACIALLY
SCULPTED LANDSCAPE CULMINATING IN THE
GREAT GORGE AND SHELDON AMPHITHEATER
AIR TOUBS WITH THE OPPORTUNITV TO
LAND ON AND WALK jBiBQM^TWe'SliAejfeft
OVERNIGHT STAYS iWMOUNTAIN HUTS
GLACIER INTERPRETATION AND
DEPARTURE POINT AT ALDER CREEK
FOR HIKING,DOG SLED TRIPS.AND
ACCESS TO MOUNTAIN HUTS AND
PRIMITIV^iCAMPSITES
LY ACCESSIBLE LAKE SET
lEST ENVIRONMENT .^r'"
CAMPING PICNICKINS.HIKING,AND NON-
MOTORIiiD BOATING SUPPORTED BY
iT^PPiRK FACILITIES
/
,HIKING.BACKCOUNTRY CAMPING AND
CROSS-COUNTRY SKIING AWAY FROM
THE MAINSTREAM OF TOURIST ACTIVIT
ANEXPANSlVEVAUeV^bFRIVEf^S.PONDS.AND FORESTS"'
ENCLOSED BY THE TOKOSHA MOUNTAINS AND CURRY RIDGE
•VIEWING OF MOOSE.SWANS.fk«P OTHER
WILDLIFE f
•RlVt"RAFTING,CROSS-COUNTRY SKIING,
AND DOG SLED TRIPS
•WILDERNESSOVERNIGHT STAYS IN
PRIMITIVE CABINS
iIK/CiHIG HWAY^
—
bib TO ;[He iouTH side of oenali.a forested
fioOR OFFERING glimpses OPMOUNT MC KINLEY .
MFOBwfATIONAND ORIENT ATI0f>J
•PICNICKING,SCENIC VIEWING.IN-TERPRETIVE
•put-In ANDTAKE OUT FOR CHULITNA
ri>/5«prRlt'S '
.^^
"
...Gltto FOR HIKING AIUD BACK'
.^^^UNTRY CWMPtNG
-,,-,-,,,..,-..-,^SERVICES
'''-SOUTH CURRY RlPGE
best vantage point for SIMULTANEOUSLY.
EJiPERIENCiNG THE IMMENSE SCALE AND I
*GRANDEUR OF THE ALASKA ffSNGE WITHIN \
BENALI NATIONAL PARK AND THE RICH DETAILSNjF A
tJnDRA environment within DENALI STATE PARK
•ORIENTATION AND INTERPRETATION AT ^^,
'
A MAJOR VISITOR CENTER
•OVERNIGHT STAYS AT A FULL-SERVlCE
LODGE ORIENTED TO VIEWS OF TH£
ALASKA RANGE AND THE CHUL
RIVCR VALLEY
•STA&IN&irOR AIR ACGeSS INTj
MOUNTAINS AND THE RUTHC
•HIKING,PICNICKING,CAMPINll
PRETIveWALKS.AND WINTER
•ACCESS FROM THE HIGHVyAY
ALASKA-RAILROAD '
''''
\^ifi SIGNIFICANT VIEWPOINTS
^-*^*TRAILS OR HIKING ROUTES
Q
SOUTH-SIDE
LANDSCAPE FEATURES
Umied States Deparimeni ol Ihe Intarior^National PS'k Service
c«c]rHc>e6
by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources in Scenic Resources Along
the Parks Highway (1981).These recommendations promote greenbelts,
foreground studies,landscape design,and buffers to protect the scenic
resources of the corridor.
As another alternative to the more intensive recreational use of the
activity center in Denali State Park,hiking and primitive camping
opportunities will be available in the areas of the Peters Hills and the
Tokositna Glacier that are accessible by existing primitive roads.The
Peters Hills and the Tokositna Glacier will appeal to people looking for an
experience away from the highway corridor.
Since the George Parks Highway is open year-round,winter and spring
activities,such as cross-country skiing and dogsled trips,will also be
possible.When the streams are frozen,numerous opportunities will exist
to explore the Chulitna and Tokositna valleys.Aircraft will support
cross-country skiing trips into the mountain valleys and passes and onto
the glaciers.
The south-side plan proposes joint government and private commercial
development of federal and state park lands,and it will require extensive
cooperation between the National Park Service,the state of Alaska,and
private enterprise.As stated previously,a separate development concept
plan will be prepared for the south side of Denali.Specific development
proposals will be preceded by marketing studies,site analyses,and
impact analyses.
Access
The primary method of access into the northern portion of Denali will
continue to be the shuttle bus transportation system,and private and
commercial traffic will continue to be restricted.The 88.5-mile park road
is currently being upgraded to minimum park standards except in those
rugged areas where standards cannot be accomplished without an
unacceptable impact on the environment.
For the immediate future,the primary method of access into the south
side of the national park will continue to be aircraft.As part of more
detailed studies,the feasibility of expanded aircraft service from a
nearby location will be evaluated.Studies will also be conducted to
determine the feasibility of other forms of access to features in the state
and national parks.
The potential for upgrading the Stampede Trail to provide access into the
far northern area of the park was eliminated from further consideration
because of the estimated cost of construction and the potential for
environmental damage.The Final Environmental Impact Statement ,
Kantishna Hills /Dunkle Mine Study (USDI 1984)estimated the cost of this
road to be $100 million to $150 million.There is currently no economic
justification for building this road.This trail crosses the denning areas
of the Toklat and Savage wolf packs,the winter range of the Denali
caribou herd,the major movement corridor along the Toklat River for
both wolves and caribou,and many miles of pristine country that
currently are suitable for wilderness designation.
25
The National Park Service is aware that the state of Alaska might assert
certain claims of rights-of-way under Revised Statute 2477.The Park
Service intends to cooperate with the state and any other claimant in
identifying such claims,the nature,extent,and validity of which may
vary depending on the circumstances under which they were acquired or
asserted.Notwithstanding that certain RS 2477 rights-of-way may exist,
it will still be necessary for users of any right-of-way to comply with
applicable NPS permit requirements.
Interpretation
For many visitors,a view of the McKinley massif will be the high point of
their trip.The south-side activity center will orient visitors to views of
that part of the Alaska Range from both inside and outside the buildings.
Also,since Mount McKinley is shrouded in clouds much of the time,some
means of suggesting its magnificence should be displayed.Exhibits and
audiovisual presentations at the activity center,displays at the Talkeetna
ranger station,waysides along roads and trails,and guided tours and
ranger talks will complete the range of interpretive services available on
the south side of Denali.
Interpretive services on the north side will be enhanced by individualized
computer terminals and interactive video displays in the new visitor
access center and also by wayside exhibits and improved publications.
The primary means of interpretation on the north side will continue to be
the programs given by NPS naturalists and the talks presented on the
commercial tour buses.
The following interpretive themes will be developed for the park,with the
greatest emphasis placed on the specific resources of each location:
the ecosystems in the park,and the necessity for preserving large
tracts of land to support the wildlife
geology,focusing on the McKinely massif and the processes of
faulting and glaciation
mountain climbing,including both the history of the ascents of
Mount McKinley and messages about minimum-impact use and safety
for contemporary mountaineers and backpackers
man's role in the park,including the stories of the early pioneers
and the discovery of gold in Kantishna,the work of Charles Sheldon
(the hunter/naturalist who,along with the Boone and Crockett Club,
was instrumental in establishing Mount McKinley National Park),and
the ongoing subsistence use by area residents
Development Considerations
The proposals for the south side of Denali are conceptual.More detailed
plans and designs will be prepared for specific projects following the
approval of this plan.The construction of facilities will be preceded by
26
site-specific feasibility and environmental analyses and marketing studies.
Certain development considerations related to engineering feasibility,
aesthetic values,and environmental concerns are summarized below as a
guide for more detailed planning for the south side.
The location and design of facilities will require on-site evaluation of local
soil conditions.Active alluvial areas and swampy zones will be avoided
because of low bearing strength and the potential for swelling and
movement.Bedrock,glacial drift zones,and morainal deposits are
generally suitable for roads and building foundations.The
Talkeetna-Mutnala soils within the area contain a glacial till with high
bearing strength and thus good capacity for supporting building and road
foundations.This till is overlain by silty materials which occupy the
upper 15 to 30 inches.
>Sand and gravel for road fill will be obtained from alluvial deposits that \\6
lie along the creeks and established borrow sites.The selective use of c,
these materials will be based not only on feasibility,material quality,and A
^\
haul distances,but also on aesthetic impacts and effects upon fish and /1|>\yvy
wildlife within the local area.,A^V^
Construction in areas of discontinuous permafrost might require the use iV ^•'^
of special materials for foundations (gravel pads,blocks,pilings,or '^Z'c/
timbers that could be jacked up or down).Wherever feasible,more \^J^
suitable sites will be selected.•fi'^
^\\The locations,sizes,and configurations of proposed facilities will take V'ijJ^
into consideration the potentials for landslides,rockslides,avalanches,iV «».
and earthquakes.^^()^^^^
Environmental studies will precede any construction activity for the k<;>^
purpose of identifying and avoiding prime wildlife habitats and migration
routes.These generally include the river valleys associated with the
south-flowing glaciers and the extensive bog and pond areas south of the
range.Low-lying areas where willow is abundant are important moose
winter range.Wet meadows are used by trumpeter swans.Creeks and
ponds are prime use areas for beaver.Bear denning occurs on
well-drained areas near brushline,which also serve as moose summer
range.
Floodplains and wetlands will be avoided to the greatest extent practical
in the selection of sites appropriate for visitor use and development of
facilities.Development will be guided by the regulations for complying
with Executive Order 11988,"Floodplain Management,"and Executive
Order 11990,"Protection of Wetlands"(45 FR 35916 and 47 FR 36718).
Since the south side offers a potential to extend the season of use beyond
the summer season,energy conservation features will be incorporated into
facility design.Climate,slope,and aspect are important design factors.
y
27
NATURAL RESOURCES
The national interest in Denali that led Congress to expand the park in
1980 was preceded in 1974 by action on behalf of the international
community to designate the original park acreage as a biosphere reserve
under the Man and the Biosphere program of UNESCO (the United
Nations'Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization).The purpose
of this designation was to support the protection of the park's natural
processes and genetic diversity for comparison with areas that have been
altered by human activity.The primary intent of Congress in enlarging
the park and preserve was similarly to enhance the protection and
interpretation of Denali's natural resources.
Given the clear preservation intent of the Congress and faced with a
growing concern about the impacts of increasing visitor use and other
activities,the National Park Service is continuously expanding its
resource management program.The intent of the resource management
program is to understand the natural forces that shape Denali's
environment and to avoid or eliminate activities that significantly interfere
with natural processes.Although much has been done by the state of
Alaska,the National Park Service,other government agencies,
universities,and private organizations to understand the resources of
this region,there is an identified need for additional study,
understanding,and interpretation of Denali's natural systems so that
significant impacts can continue to be avoided or mitigated in the future.
This plan proposes that the ongoing program of research and monitoring
be continued.The park's current "Natural Resource Management Plan,"
which is updated annually,describes in detail the scientific research and
management program that will be employed to gain a better understanding
of park resources and to apply that knowledge in future resource-related
decision making.The "Natural Resource Management Plan"is available
for review by the public,and any major change in the direction,
philosophy,or goals presented in the "General Management Plan"will be
subject to public involvement.
The resource studies currently underway are
fire study (1982-1986)
fire plan (approved 1982,updated annually)
wildlife surveys (annual)
declining caribou herd study (1984-1986)
wolf pack monitoring (1985-1988)
bearproof food container study (1983-1985)
bear aversive conditioning study (1984-1986)
study of effects of placer mining on water quality (1981-1985)
study for revegetation of placer mining areas (proposed)
air quality monitoring (1980,ongoing)
vegetation trampling study (1977-1984)
Dall sheep study (1984-1985)
28
The U.S.Forest Service is also conducting research that will include
studies of the moose and Dall ram populations of the park.
The primary concerns of natural resource managers at Denali are briefly
discussed in the following paragraphs.
Wildlife Management
Most current management concerns are related to wildlife.In accordance
with NPS policy and legislation specific to the park,managers are
striving to maintain the natural abundance,behavior,diversity,and
habitat of Denali's native wildlife and fish populations.
Both sport and subsistence hunting are permitted in the preserve,and
local rural residents are permitted to continue traditional subsistence
uses,including subsistence hunting,within established use areas in the
new park additions.The lands within former Mount McKinley National
Park are closed to all hunting activity (see appendix A).A subsistence
resource commission composed of members nominated by the National Park
Service,state of Alaska,and the Regional Council has been formed in
accordance with section 810 of ANILCA.The commission will submit a
hunting program to the secretary of the interior by the end of 1985.
The subsistence use evaluation required by section 810 of ANILCA has
been conducted as a part of this planning effort and is included as
appendix F.
In cooperation with the National Park Service the state of Alaska is
responsible for establishing fishing,hunting,and trapping regulations for
those lands recently added to the park and preserve.A memorandum of
understanding between the National Park Service and Alaska Department
of Fish and Game (reprinted in appendix G)defines the cooperative
management responsibilities of each agency.The NPS management
program,which focuses on the collection of baseline data and on
monitoring to determine trends and potential impacts,is in substantial
agreement with most ADF&G goals and research proposals.The two
agencies will continue to cooperate in the collection,interpretation,and
dissemination of fish and wildlife research data on projects of mutual
concern.NPS and other federal,state,and university personnel
exchange data and consult on matters affecting wildlife populations within
Denali.The state may undertake studies related to the regulation of
sport and subsistence harvests.When the taking of fish and wildlife
conflicts with other established purposes of the park and preserve,the
National Park Service may implement regulations concerning consumptive
uses that are more restrictive than the laws and regulations of the state.
The Park Service will ensure access for state officials for purposes of
conducting research and managing wildlife where these activities are
consistent with NPS policies and regulations.The park staff will also
cooperate with the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in identifying activities that
adversely affect fish and wildlife.The park's interpretive program will
educate visitors about specific human behaviors that are particularly
disturbing to wildlife.
29
'•^*Siw^^-n
Because of a concern that increasing vehicle traffic on the park road is
causing unacceptable impacts on wildlife,this plan proposes further
restrictions on the use of the park road (refer to the north-side
proposals under "Visitor Use and Development").This decision is
supported by the data gathered in a recent study (NPS,Singer and
Beattie 1984).The existing visitor transportation system limits the
number of vehicles on the park road,and training has helped drivers
avoid some of the incidents that are particularly disturbing to wildlife.
These actions have been effective in lessening impacts on wildlife and will
be continued,and the impacts of vehicle use will continue to be
monitored.
Bears .A major concern of park managers is the potential for human/bear
conflicts because they threaten human safety and could result in a loss of
wild and free-ranging grizzly bears.While no fatalities have occurred,
the increasing number of encounters and incidents of property damage
may signify a change in the natural behavior of bears.Park records
indicate that the number of incidents increased from three to five times in
the period 1972-1980 in the frontcountry where the campgrounds are
located.More human injuries by bears were reported during the period
from 1970 to 1981 than during all previous years.Additionally,from 1978
to 1981 there were reportedly up to 40 occurrences annually of humans
being approached by bears showing curiosity or lack of fear.An
analysis of available records indicates that Denali's backcountry
human/grizzly incident rate is the highest reported in the national park
system.
The park staff operates an extensive management program to minimize
human/bear encounters within the park.All visitors receive printed
literature concerning bears,and all backcountry permit holders also
receive verbal instruction.Other features of the program include ranger
patrols,bus driver guidance,employee training,and use of bearproof
food-storage and trash facilities.
Present management actions to minimize human/bear conflicts will continue.
The park staff will work to improve the incident reporting process,
increase employee training,enhance the field response capability,and
promote greater visitor awareness^In addition,research has been
initiated to determine the seasonal distribution and relative abundance of
grizzly bears.This information will be correlated with traditional hiker
routes and camping areas to identify areas with high potential for
conflicts.Research has been undertaken to improve backcountry food
containers,determine the effectiveness of temporary area closures,and
establish appropriate levels of visitor use.Humans,rather than bears,
will be removed from areas with high potential for conflict.The proposal
to phase out the campgrounds at Sanctuary,Igloo,and Teklanika is
based,in part,on this management concept.
A past solution in many parks has been to relocate problem bears;
however,this concept has two flaws.First,it does not remedy the
situation that caused the bear to become a problem,and the bear remains
a problem somewhere else.Second,removal of bears alters the genetic
and social integrity of the natural bear population,which is a key feature
of this particular biosphere reserve.Unhunted and unmanipulated
31
natural bear populations are almost unavailable elsewhere,and Denali's
population is a valuable control group for studies of other populations.
Removal of bears disrupts the natural social diversity of a population and
in time leads to a population where only the shy and reclusive are
unnaturally selected.The state of Alaska also recognizes problems with a
relocation policy and prohibits the relocation of Denali bears to areas
outside the park boundaries (ADF&G 1982).
Caribou .The decline in the Denali caribou herd is another matter of
immediate management concern.The herd,estimated to number 20,000 to
30,000 in 1944,has declined to approximately 2,600 in number today.
While caribou are known to experience rises and declines in population,
the reasons for the dramatic decline of the Denali herd are the subject of
continuing research.Several factors have been suggested,including past
hunting pressure outside the park,road and other development,disease,
natural predation,and declining range quality.Emigration,or exchange
between the Denali and other herds,has also been considered.The state
of Alaska has prohibited hunting of the Denali herd since 1977.Current
caribou-related research and monitoring conducted by the park staff
include
monitoring of herd activity and surveillance for poaching
a three-year caribou calf mortality study (1984-1986)to investigate
calving areas,yearling ratios,and other reproduction factors
studies to evaluate the effects of predation
observations of caribou movements relative to the ongoing work to
rehabilitate the park road
Ground and air patrols will be initiated to prevent harassment and
poaching during times when caribou are migrating near the park road or
otherwise more susceptible to the impact of humans.Other activities
related to caribou are described in the park's "Resource Management
Plan."
Wolve s.The protection of healthy and natural wolf populations within
Denali is a continuing objective of the National Park Service.Wolves are
important predators within Denali but are a species of relatively low
density,so their role in the natural ecological processes is easily altered
by man.The behavior and significance of the wolves at Denali were most
eloquently discussed by Adolph Murie in his book.The Wolves of Mount
McKinley (1944).In consideration of the great importance of the small
wolf population at Denali,and because the range of some of Denali's
wolves extends beyond the park's boundaries,the park staff is
particularly concerned with safeguarding the viability of these animals.
Park managers will continue to protect dens,secondary homesites,and
rendezvous sites from recreational use disturbance through seasonal
closures and a monitoring program.Aerial patrols will be increased to
protect wolves against illegal hunting.ANILCA permits subsistence
hunting and trapping of wolves in the park additions,and both
subsistence and sport harvests are permitted in the preserve.Action will
32
be taken to ensure that legal subsistence and sport harvests are
consistent with the legislative objectives for wildlife protection in the
area,one of which is to maintain natural predator/prey relationships.To
minimize human influences on the predator/prey balance in the designated
wilderness,the park staff will initiate research to determine the nature
and extent of pack territories,and recommendations will be developed for
the protection of packs whose primary territories are in the wilderness
but extend into areas otherwise open to harvest.The superintendent has
reserved the authority to close portions of the park or the preserve to
subsistence and sport hunting of wolves.Such closures could be
instituted on an emergency,temporary,or permanent basis.Such action
would require public notification of the reasons for the action (36 CFR
13.30).
Mineral Management
Mining on valid existing claims is authorized in the park subject to
applicable laws and regulations.In the absence of any new federal
legislation governing mineral development in Denali,the level of mining
activity is expected to remain fairly constant for the next 10 years.The
National Park Service would oppose a significant increase in mining
operations.Federal lands within the park and preserve have been
withdrawn from additional mineral location,entry,and patent under the
United States mining laws,subject to valid existing rights (see appendix
A).The 464 recorded placer and lode mining claims (patented and
unpatented)encompass an estimated 12,620 acres within Denali National
Park and Preserve.Of this total the 39 patented claims occupy
approximately 757 acres.Current mineral development activity on
existing claims in the Kantishna Hills includes placer mining of gold and
silver and limited small-scale lode mining of silver,gold,and antimony.
The current level of mineral development is described in detail in the
Final Environmental Impact Statement ,Kantishna Hills /Dunkle Mine Study
prepared for the Alaska Land Use Council by an interagency work group
(USDI 1984).
The patented and unpatented claims may continue to operate,subject to
federal mineral management regulations (36 CFR 9A).Mine operators are
required to submit plans of operations (36 CFR 9.9)which,among other
things,must describe how the operation will comply with federal,state,
and local laws and minimize impacts on park resources.ANILCA (section
1110(b))guarantees adequate and feasible access to valid mining claims
within the park.Access to the Kantishna Hills mining claims will continue
to be provided by the existing park road.The estimated 1983
mining-related traffic on the park road was 270 round trips per month,
and it is assumed that this level of traffic will continue.
Lode and placer mining operations may adversely affect park values such
as water quality,fisheries,and wildlife,and they require continuing *^
federal and state investigation and cooperative management efforts.
Federal regulations governing mining operations in the park are being
revised and will be made available for public comment at a later date.
33
The Clean Water Act (section 402)requires an Environmental Protection
Agency wastewater discharge permit for each mining operation.
Ordinarily,states certify this permit,but in Alaska the Department of
Environmental Conservation (ADEC)has waived this certification process
and enforces the state's own water quality standards,which are more
restrictive than the EPA standards.ADEC field personnel have monitored
mining operations to evaluate turbidity,sediment,heavy metal,and
settleable solid levels in mine effluent,suggested ways miners can lessen
impacts on water quality,and sought voluntary compliance with water
quality standards.The park staff is cooperating with ADEC and is
conducting research in Kantishna on mining effects on fisheries and water
quality.Currently,the National Park Service requires mine operators to
use effective settling ponds wherever an operation would discharge
wastewater to receiving streams.This requirement improves compliance
with applicable water quality standards.Recirculation of mine process
waters in conjunction with settling ponds is not currently required.
Denali's "Resource Management Plan"proposes a cooperative federal/state
program to coordinate mining-related research and to develop "the best
alternative technology economically achievable"and associated compliance
strategies.Such pooling of agency resources could avoid research
duplication and would simplify procedures by establishing a lead agency
for impact analysis and enforcement.
The National Park Service remains concerned over possible development of
patented mining properties for uses other than mining activities.
Therefore a recommendation to acquire surface estates of patented
properties is a component of the "Land Protection Plan."
Fire Management
The National Park Service is a participant in the Tanana-Minchumina
interagency fire management plan,which encompasses most of the
fire-dependent ecosystems of Denali (as well as millions of outlying
acres).The plan,which coordinates the fire management objectives of all
the participating regional landowners,was completed and put into
operation for the 1982 fire season.In accordance with NPS policy,the
objective for Denali is to allow natural forest and tundra fires to fulfill
their ecological role in vegetational succession.Under the plan,natural
fires occurring in Denali will be allowed to burn unless they threaten
inholdings,certain identified historic sites,or neighboring lands that are
zoned for protection.Such neighboring lands include abutting native
regional and village corporation lands,which are currently managed for
total fire suppression.
The ability of the park staff to accurately predict fire behavior is
restricted by a lack of basic data regarding weather patterns,fuel types,
and the effectiveness of natural barriers.The National Park Service is
completing a comprehensive fire history and needs to more thoroughly map
park vegetation in an effort to develop fire prescriptions for Denali's
fire-prone zones.In addition to the fire weather stations established at
park headquarters and at Wonder Lake in 1981,the Alaska Fire Service
has installed one automatic fire weather station at a remote location,and
34
the park plans to install two more.With more accurate fire prescriptions
in the future,the park staff can allow natural fires to fulfill their
ecological role to the greatest extent possible,while simultaneously being
prepared to protect life and property as required in the
Tanana-Minchumina fire plan.
Backcountry Management
A "Backcountry Use Plan"was developed and implemented in 1976 in
response to an unprecedented increase in use of the backcountry.The
plan is revised annually.The primary objectives of the plan are to
provide backcountry opportunities for visitors while (1)preventing
vegetation damage which would not recover within one growing season,
(2)preventing the creation of trails,campsites,and other signs of human
use which compromise wilderness values,and (3)minimizing human
impacts upon wildlife (University of Washington 1979;Sundstrom 1983).
The wilderness area is zoned into a number of backcountry units,and
only a limited number of overnight permits are issued for each unit.
Fires,littering,cutting of vegetation,and other activities that would mar
the environment are prohibited.Some vegetation trampling and trail
formation occurs,but overall impacts are minor.
To the extent possible,visitor use will remain dispersed so that no areas
become overused.If visitor pressure for use of the backcountry
increases,park managers may add accessible areas in the new park and
preserve additions to the backcountry permit system.The proposed
development of new facilities on the south side of the park (see "Visitor
Use and General Development")will facilitate access to and use of
backcountry areas in this part of Denali.Future increases in demand for
backcountry recreation can be met on the south side,allowing the
perpetuation of appropriate levels of use throughout the entire park.The
south side will be included in the "Backcountry Management Plan."
The park intends to maintain primarily a "no formal trails"policy for the
designated wilderness area on the north side of Denali.Generally,hiking
routes in this portion of the park follow natural drainages and therefore
do not require designation or maintenance.The no trails policy will be
extenaed to include the northern additions to the park wherever possible.
Along the park road corridor and near the park entrance,the existing
short loop trails will be maintained for continued use.The southern
additions to the park will be managed in a different fashion.Trail routes
will be designated and routine maintenance will be conducted as part of
the south-side development.
Site Restoration
Active revegetation with native species will be undertaken for areas
within the park road corridor,at development sites,and at mining sites
that have suffered vegetation damage or loss.NPS policy allows for
manipulation of terrain and vegetative cover in natural zones to restore
natural gradients and native vegetation on human-altered lands.As part
35
of future development projects (water,sewer,borrow pits,and other
uses),native vegetation will be retained and stockpiled wherever practical
for use in revegetation work.Research to refine handling techniques and
acceptable time periods for stockpiling will continue,and a handbook of
technical guidelines and methods will be prepared for use by the park
staff.The handbook will cover erosion potentials,revegetation time
frames,and specific treatments for all the major soil and vegetation types
in the park.
Air Quality Management
The 1977 amendments to the Clean Air Act designated Denali National Park
and Preserve as a federal class I air quality area.At the present time
air quality in the park is considered excellent.Monitoring of air quality
and visibility will be expanded as lands surrounding the park are
developed,to ensure that resource values inside the park are not
impaired by external sources of pollution.The park staff will update the
equipment at the existing monitoring sites (the National Atmospheric
Deposition Program monitoring station at the park headquarters and two
vista points),and they will conduct a technical review to determine the
need for additional stations at other locations.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The National Park Service will provide for the identification,
preservation,protection,and interpretation of all significant cultural
resources through adequate research and programming in accordance with
NPS policy and guidelines.No undertakings resulting in the destruction
or loss of known cultural resources are proposed in this plan.
The identification and treatment of the park's prehistoric and historic
resources is one of the long-range goals of park management.Specific
actions for accomplishing this objective are described in the park's
"Cultural Resource Management Plan,"which is updated yearly,or as
necessary,to reflect changing preservation needs and management
priorities.The plan is available for review by the public,and any major
changes in the direction,philosophy,or goals described by this "General
Management Plan"will be subject to public involvement.
The current cultural resource study priorities are to
complete preliminary site studies and architectural evaluations for
critical area resources:Teklanika archeological district,the park
headquarters area,and other historic structures in the park
monitor the cultural and natural resource concerns for areas of the
park and preserve that are open to subsistence uses
There are currently about 100 historic and prehistoric sites recorded in
the park.The cultural resource data are incomplete.The National Park
Service has sponsored limited site and critical-area resource studies
(studies of the Kantishna Hills and Dunkle Mine areas,for example);
36
however,little of the land within the park has been closely examined for
prehistoric and historic resources.Some of the land additions made to
the park in 1980 have been subject to reconnaissance studies,but the
presence and significance of cultural resources in that area are not well
established.The historic period is briefly chronicled in a number of
publications and topical/anecdotal writings,most of which rely heavily
upon the works of former park ranger and superintendent Grant Pearson.
Currently the only resource in the park listed on the National Register of
Historic Places is the Teklanika archeological district.The park
headquarters district and dog kennels have been evaluated by park and
regional staffs and will be nominated to the National Register.
In order to more completely document the presence of cultural resources
in the park,an inventory will be undertaken by a multidisciplinary team
of archeologists,historical architects,and historians.The park will be
inventoried in geographic segments over a four-year period to document
the presence of cultural resources.The reports resulting from the
survey will identify and prioritize sites for which actions are necessary.
Sites will be recorded,base maps will be produced,resources will be
professionally evaluated for eligibility for the National Register of Historic
Places and the park's List of Classified Structures (LCS),and
preservation treatment plans will be prepared.
Resources listed on the National Register and the LCS will be provided
the protection and interpretation afforded to such listed properties.
Potential LCS structures will be further evaluated for adaptive and
interpretive uses.
Until such time as native land selections are complete,the National Park
Service will protect,preserve,and manage all native historic sites
identified under the provisions of section 14(h)of the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act of 1971 as properties eligible to the National
Register.The National Park Service will encourage the owners of
nonfederal historic properties within the park to nominate them to the
National Register,and it will provide technical assistance and advice in
proper care and treatment of such properties.
A historic resource study will build upon the initial inventory.This
study will describe the obvious and more subdued themes of the history
of Dt.nali.The initial themes that have been identified are Russian
efforts at mapping and exploration of the interior,American exploration
and surveying,mountaineering,gold mining,and the building of the
Alaska Railroad.The current park administrative history will be
expanded to incorporate the story of park developments since 1953.
A preservation maintenance program will be developed to guide the park
staff in performing routine maintenance on structures,equipment,and
artifacts.
The assembled cultural resource information,including a cultural resource
base map,will be used for interpretation of the cultural resources for the
public.Interpretation will also make visitors aware of the fragile nature
of many of the cultural resources and will alert visitors to the protected
status of the resources.Use of information for interpretive purposes will
be preceded by consultation with any affected native group.
37
Development proposals that relate to cultural resources will reflect a
sensitivity to the preservation of the cultural scene through compatible
and complementary design.All developments with potential for ground
disturbance will be preceded by archeological surveys and clearances.
Native groups will be consulted in order to avoid impacts upon traditional
or sacred sites.Projects will be designed to avoid impacts or to have
minimal effects on cultural resources.
Archeological Sites
Limited archeological surveys have been conducted in scattered locations
throughout the park and preserve.The majority of the surveys took
place in the early 1960s and were conducted under contracts by the
University of Alaska (Traganza 1964;Morgan 1965;West 1965).The
results were meager,and additional archeological work did not resume
until the late 1970s,when clearance was needed for the construction of a
power line south along the Nenana River valley road to park
headquarters.Recent surveys (NPS,Davis 1980)significantly
contributed to the knowledge of prehistory and to the identification of
archeological sites of the area,but Denali still lacks a systematic
parkwide archeological survey and overview.An archeological overview
will be developed by first identifying all significant archeological sites and
then conducting selective archeological investigations in typical,stable
environm'^nt areas (such as ridgetops)to develop a comprehensive
understaiiding of the prehistory of Denali.
The protection of archeological sites and districts will include permanently
marking sites;monitoring selected sites to determine continuing natural
and human impacts;conducting test excavations of selected sites to
evaluate them and to plan further preservation actions;gathering data to
determine significance for National Register eligibility;and recovering
data at sites that could be affected by development,use,or natural
destructive forces.
All data recovery,such as controlled surface collection and excavation,
will be designed to obtain the most information with the least destruction
of archeological resources.When excavation is made necessary by
development,it will be programmed in timely advance of construction (not
less than one fiscal year).
Surface collection will be undertaken to professionally record and
preserve artifacts that are potentially subject to adverse impacts because
of vandalism or proposed development actions.This surface collection will
be conducted only by professional archeologists meeting professional
standards.
Historic Structures
As a general policy historic structures and sites,such as native villages,
historic cabins,or mining complexes,will not be reconstructed.Visitor
understanding will be gained through other interpretive techniques.
38
When preservation or restoration of existing structures is specified,the
intent will be to preserve existing original work and to maintain it by
compatible repair or replacement of deteriorated fabric.New work on
such structures,when required for maintenance purposes,will conform to
the building's original character and be undertaken only when it can be
satisfactorily documented.When restoration is not possible,the elements
being replaced will be duplicated.
Certain structures may not merit preservation because of minimal
significance,advanced deterioration,or excessive costs.These
structures will be allowed to deteriorate naturally,with their sites
eventually reverting to a natural condition.Some removal of hazardous
elements may be necessary for safety and to avoid an attractive nuisance,
particularly around abandoned mining sites.Park users will be alerted to
the potential hazards associated with these structures,which do have
value as "discovery"sites.
Historic archeology for the purpose of uncovering all available details and
increasing knowledge of historic structures plays a significant role in the
restoration and reconstruction of historic sites.Historic archeological
investigations will be as complete as possible,and archeological deposits
will be clearly identified.Any actions affecting these deposits will be
designed for minimal impact.
Contemporary Native American Concerns
The National Park Service will ensure the preservation of resources
associated with native peoples whose cultural memory,traditions,and
lives are closely associated with the park and its general vicinity.
The ongoing identification of areas of sacred and traditional importance to
local native peoples will be continued by professional archeologists and
anthropologists.As new information is obtained,it will be added to the
confidential inventory of these sites.Measures will be taken to ensure
that mutually acceptable methods of protection and preservation are
adopted,in conformance with NPS management policies and legislation.
The National Park Service will encourage active participation of local
native groups in developing methods of interpreting native American
culture.
PARK OPERATIONS
The park headquarters will remain in its present location.The current
staffing level for headquarters is considered adequate with the exception
of a wildlife biologist.Filling this position is a high priority of park
management.Additionally,aircraft availability on a year-round basis is
considered necessary for the proper management of the park complex.
The visitor use proposals will require establishing a district operation on
the south side of Denali.The facilities needed for management,
operations,maintenance,etc.,on the south side will be constructed
39
sepat'ate fr^om the activity center.These facilities will require cooperative
managemerTt with the Alaska Division of Parks,and actual staffing needs
will depend on agreements reached with that agency.The long-range
personnel requirements for the south side are estimated as follows:
1 permanent district ranger
1 permanetTt maitTtenatTce worker
3 temporary maintenance worker's
2 temporarv park rangers
4 temporary interpr'eters
1 petMnatient secretary
The National Park Service has author'ity to h'we local individuals who have
special knowledge or expertise concerning the r^esources of the unit
uithoLit regard to civil service requirements or other personnel
limitations,according to section 1308 of ANILCA.The Park Service will
continue to recruit and develop such local individuals for seasonal and
permanent staff positions.
40
LAND PROTECTION PLAN
SUMMARY
Current ownership (acres):
Federal 5,933,220
State 32,103
Private 62,768
Total 6,028,091
Number of tracts remaining to be protected:527
Methods of protection proposed (acres*):
fee-simple acquisition through exchange,donation,
or purchase 85,292
acquisition of surface estates through exchange,
donation,or purchase 640
acquisition of mineral interest through exchange,
donation,or purchase 1,300
acquisition of scenic/habitat easements through
exchange,donation,or purchase 27,954
fee-simple acquisition of state lands currently
outside the park boundary 95,000
zoning
regulation 5,290
adequately protected 1,248
Statutory acreage ceiling:
Funding status as of December 1,1984:
Authorized acquisition ceiling:
Appropriated to date:
Obligated to date:
Unobligated balance:
Top priorities:
Wolf townships
Kantishna Hills surface estates
*The acreages listed in this section exceed the total nonfederal land
acreage because they include mineral interests on federal lands.
41
INTRODUCTION
In May 1982 the Department of the Interior issued a policy statement for
use of the federal portion of the Land and Water Conservation Fund which
requires that,in carrying out its responsibility for land protection in
federally administered areas,each agency using the fund will follow the
procedures listed below:
Identify what lands or interests in land need to be in federal
ownership to achieve management purposes consistent with the public
objectives for the unit.
Use to the maximum extent practical cost-effective alternatives to
direct federal purchase of private lands and,when acquisition is
necessary,acquire or retain only the minimum interests necessary to
meet management objectives.
Cooperate with landowners,other federal agencies,state and local
governments,and the private sector to manage land for public use
and resource conservation.
Formulate,or revise as necessary,plans for land acquisition and
resource use or protection to ensure that sociocultural impacts are
considered and that the most outstanding areas are adequately
managed
.
In response to this policy,the National Park Service requires that a land
protection plan be prepared for each unit of the national park system that
contains private or other nonfederal lands or interests in land within its
authorized boundary.
The guiding principle of each land protection plan is to ensure the
protection of that unit of the national park system consistent with the
stated purpose for which it was created and administered.Land
protection plans are intended to accomplish several tasks:
Determine what lands or interests in land need to be in public
ownership and what means of protection other than fee acquisition
are available to achieve the purpose of the unit as established by
Congress.
Inform landowners of National Park Service intentions to buy land or
protect it through other means.
Help managers identify priorities for making budget requests and
allocating available funds to protect land and unit resources.
Find opportunities to help protect the unit by cooperating with state
or local governments,landowners,and the private sector.
A major issue addressed by this plan is the potential for increased traffic
on the park road associated with new visitor accommodations that might be
built on private lands in the Kantishna Hills.It has been demonstrated
that traffic causes avoidance behavior by some wildlife,and one of the
42
objectives of the general management plan is to reduce traffic levels on
the road (see the discussion of visitor use and general development in the
"General Management Plan"section of this document).Another issue is
the protection of important habitat for caribou and wolves that inhabit
lands inside the park for much of the year but also utilize adjacent lands.
This plan does not constitute an offer to purchase lands or interests in
land;neither does it diminish the rights of nonfederal landowners.The
plan is intended to guide subsequent land protection activities subject to
the availability of funds and other constraints.
PURPOSE OF THE PARK AND RESOURCES TO BE PROTECTED
Significance and Purpose of the Park
Denali National Park and Preserve encompasses an internationally
significant subarctic ecosystem that serves as a baseline for the study of
comparable environments around the world.The original purposes in
establishing the park in 1917 were to preserve wildlife,"natural
curiosities,"and "scenic beauties"for the benefit and enjoyment of the
people.These purposes were reinforced by ANILCA when the park was
enlarged in 1980.A more detailed description of the legislated purposes
of the park is provided in appendix A.
Resource Description
Denali is primarily a natural area known for its outstanding Alaskan
wildlife and the highest mountain in North America.A detailed
description of the park's resources is contained in the "Affected
Environment"section of this document.
Legislative Authorities
Passage of ANILCA provided a general framework for land protection for
the newly established conservation units in Alaska.Section 1302 contains
the general authorities for land acquisition (see appendix H).The
secretary of the interior is authorized to acquire,by purchase,donation,
exchange,or otherwise,any lands or interests in land within the park
and preserve.However,any lands or interests in land owned by the
state and local governments or by native village and regional corporations
may be acquired only with the consent of the owners.In addition,lands
owned by natives,allotted under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,
who received title to the surface estate of lands from a village corporation
as a primary place of residence,business,or subsistence campsite
(section 14(c)(1))or from the secretary of the interior as a primary place
of residence (section 14(b)(5))may be acquired only with the consent of
the owner unless the secretary determines that the land is no longer
being used for the purpose for which it was conveyed and that the use is
or will be detrimental to the purposes of the preserve.
43
Native allotments or other private small tracts may be acquired without
consent only after offering an exchange for other public lands of similar
characteristics and like value and if the owner chooses not to accept the
exchange.Exchanges are complicated by selections and past conveyances
of lands within the state and by the lack of suitable substitute lands.
No improved property may be acquired without the consent of the owner
unless the acquisition is necessary for the protection of resources or for
protection of the values listed in ANILCA.When an owner of improved
property consents to exchange lands or to sell to the United States,the
owner may retain a right of use and occupancy for noncommercial
residential and recreational use by agreement with the National Park
Service.
Section 1302(i)(1)and (2)of ANILCA authorizes the secretary of the
interior to acquire,by donation or exchange,state-owned or validly
selected lands that are contiguous to the park.Any lands so acquired
will become part of the conservation unit without reference to the
23,000-acre restriction included in minor boundary adjustments as defined
in section 103(b).
Section 103(b)states that only the public land within the boundaries of
any conservation system unit is included as a portion of the unit.The
state,native,and other private lands within the boundaries are not
subject to regulations applicable solely to the federal lands.If conveyed
to the federal government under the provisions cited above,such lands
become part of the preserve and are subject to the federal regulations.
In addition to complying with the above legislative and administrative
requirements,the National Park Service must administer the area as a
unit of the national park system pursuant to the provisions of the act of
August 25,1916 (39 Stat.535)as amended and supplemented,and in
accordance with the provisions of title 16 of the United States Code ,title
36 of the Code of Federal Regulations ,and other applicable laws.The
National Park Service has jurisdiction over federally owned lands in the
unit.
Resource Management and Visitor Use Objectives
The general management plan proposes to protect sensitive wildlife habitat
on the north side of the Alaska Range by decreasing vehicle traffic and
camping in the road corridor.Increases in visitor use will be
accommodated by opening up a second visitor service and activity center
on the south side of Denali.Natural resources will be monitored,and
activities found to have an adverse effect on resource values will be
modified or eliminated.These proposals are described in more detail in
the "General Management Plan"section of this document.
Specifically,the land protection objectives at Denali are to preserve and
protect the park's natural and cultural values from the adverse effects of
incompatible activities and to protect the visitor experience from intrusive
development.Resources that are particularly susceptible to damage and
therefore most in need of protection are wildlife habitat,water quality,
scenic quality,and recreational value.
44
LANDOWNERSHIP AND USES
Current Land Status Inside the Park and Preserve Boundary
At the present time 97,726 acres,or 1.6 percent of the land within the
boundaries of Denali National Park and Preserve,are either in nonfederal
ownership or under application.These nonfederal lands or interests are
owned or held by the state of Alaska,Alaska native regional and village
corporations and groups,and private individuals (table 2).State lands
account for 31 percent of these nonfederal lands.An additional 9,280
acres,more or less,of unpatented mining claims exist within Denali.
While the surface estates of unpatented mining claims are retained in
federal ownership,these lands remain encumbered by mineral rights.
Table 2:Land Status
General Acres
Park 4,716,726
Preserve 1,311,365
Total 6,028,091
Federal 5,933,220
Nonfederal 94,871
Nonfederal Categories
State application (including submerged lands)32,103
Native regional corporation 55,048
Under application 54,673
Patented 375
Native village corporation 4,750
Under application 4,750
Patented
Native allotments 1,220
Small tracts 244
Cemetery/historic sites (applications)839
Patented mining claims 667
Overlapping applications (478)
Total 94,871
For the most part the nonfederal lands are concentrated in three specific
areas of the park.The Kantishna Hills contain 292 patented and
unpatented mining claims and some small tracts of private land.The
Cantwell/Dunkle Mine area contains 163 unpatented mining claims along
with state and regional and village corporation lands under application.
An area near Lake Minchumina in the preserve contains state,regional
corporation,and native group lands under application (some covering
entire townships)and some small tract entries and cemetery sites.The
state submerged lands of concern in Denali are the navigable portions of
45
the Tokositna,Kantishna,and Muddy rivers.These lands are shown
generally on the Land Status map.Individual tracts are listed in
appendix i
.
Compatibility of Land Uses
Existing land uses provide small-scale recreational services and visitor
opportunities that are compatible with the management objectives for the
park.Any development that would cause traffic along the Denali park
road to increase beyond 1984 levels would be incompatible.One of the
objectives of the general management plan is to reduce traffic on the road
to decrease avoidance behavior by wildlife (see the discussion of visitor
use and development in the "General Management Plan"section of this
document).
The existing and potential uses of nonfederal lands are described below.
Native Regional and Village Corporations .ANCSA established native
shareholder corporations and enabled them to make applications for land
selections.Two regional corporations--Doyon,Limited,and Ahtna,
lncorporated--have made prior-right applications for lands within Denali
National Park and Preserve,but only a small portion of these lands have
been conveyed.ANILCA,section 906(a),provides that "at such time as
the entitlement of any Native Corporation to land under the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act is satisfied,any land within a conservation unit
selected by such Native Corporation shall,to the extent that such land is
excess of its entitlement,become part of such unit and administered
accordingly.
"
Doyon has developed long-term plans for its selected lands if conveyance
takes place.The corporation has indicated an interest in developing
tourist recreational facilities within the next 10 to 15 years in the vicinity
of Lake Chilchukabena,where access would be provided by float planes.
Planning is in a very early stage,but managers foresee developing a
large lodge facility rather than cabin sites,if warranted by future
demand.
Ahtna currently has no plans for its application lands within the park
boundary.Park managers believe these sections,and also the sections
selected by the Cantwell Village Corporation (which has since merged with
the regional corporation)will be relinquished.
The Minchumina native group has selected several sections within the
preserve boundary.Potential uses of group selections will likely
concentrate on subsistence use,but they may include commercial guiding
or development.
Small Private Tracts .Existing uses of the scattered small tract entries
include a mountaineer staging camp in the Ruth Amphitheater,recreational
lodges in the Kantishna area,homesteads,cabin sites,and subsistence
activities.Future uses of these tracts could include additional private or
commercial development.
46
'^f'f^'f^^NATIVE REGIONAL CORPORATION
STATE LANDS AND APPLICATIONS
^ffjfflffffP NATIVE VILLAGE CORPORATION
CEMETERY SFTE OR HISTORIC PLACE
PATENTED MINING CLAIMS
SMALL TRACT ENTRIES
•AIRSTRIP
|k»GLACIER
LAND
STATUS
Native Allotments .Applications for parcels up to 160 acres within the
preserve have been filed under the 1906 Alaska Native Allotment Act.
Uses of these lands by their owners may include private and commercial
development and use of renewable resources,but not development of coal,
oil,or gas or construction of ditches or canals (these rights are reserved
by the federal government on the title documents).To date these
allotments have occasionally been used for subsistence and recreational
purposes.
Cemetery/Historic Sites (ANCSA 14(h)(1)sites).Three sites within the
park and preserve have been selected based on their importance to native
cultural heritage.However,since the lands containing the selections
were already reserved at the time of the selection,it appears that they
will not be conveyed and will remain under the protection of the United
States.
State of Alaska .The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 and the Alaska
Statehood Act of 1958 provide for state ownership of the beds of
navigable waters to the "ordinary high water mark."Determination of
what waters are navigable is an ongoing process in Alaska at both
administrative and judicial levels.A 4-mile segment of the Tokositna
River has been determined to be navigable,and title therefore lies with
the state of Alaska.The matter of navigability of portions of the
Kantishna and Muddy rivers is still in adjudication.If portions are
determined to be navigable,ownership of the submerged lands will lie
with the state.Potential uses of state-owned submerged lands include
gravel extraction,placer mining,and oil and gas development.
The state has applied for adjacent lands along the eastern boundary of
the park and adjacent lands in the Minchumina region.The state has no
plans at present to subdivide these selections if they are conveyed (draft
"Tanana Basin Plan,"1984).Future uses could include subdivision,
commercial development,and oil,gas,or mineral development.
Mining Claims .Existing and potential mining and mineral development in
the Kantishna Hills/Dunkle Mine area are addressed extensively in two
documents:the Environmental Overview and Analysis of Mining Effects
(NPS 1981a)and the Final Environmental Impact Statement ,Kantishna
Hills/Dunkle Mine Study (USDI 1984).The latter document was prepared
for the Alaska Land Use Council by an interagency work group and
examines several alternatives for future uses of the mining areas.Based
on this study the Alaska Land Use Council has recommended the
implementation of a mineral leasing program for the Kantishna Hills area
and has recommended status quo management for the Dunkle Mine area on
the south side of the Alaska Range.These recommendations are being
forwarded to Congress.The implementation of a mineral leasing program
would require an act of Congress,since the park and preserve are
currently closed to all forms of new mineral entry.Until such time as
Congress may act upon the recommendations of the council,both the
Kantishna Hills and Dunkle Mine areas will continue to be managed
according to existing applicable laws and regulations.
The assumption is made in the environmental impact statement on the
Kantishna Hills/Dunkle Mine study that if mining is increased substantially
49
on existing patented and unpatented mining claims in the Kantishna Hills,
a new mining access road will be required to Inandle the additional mining
traffic between the state highway system and the Kantishna Hills.As
stated in the environmental impact statement,"this access route would
require applying Title XI of ANILCA and necessary additional
environmental analysis and compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act for the project.Title XI requires all feasible access corridors
to be evaluated,and an additional EIS would have to be prepared."The
National Park Service does not support either an expanded mineral leasing
program or a new mining access road.
External Conditions Affecting Land Protection
The National Park Service may not acquire interests in land outside the
unit with two exceptions:Section 103(b)of ANILCA provides for minor
boundary adjustments up to 23,000 acres,and section 1302(i)allows for
the acquisition of contiguous state lands through exchange or donation.
Protection of resources and the visitor experience can be affected by
adjacent land uses in a positive way,if the uses are compatible with the
purpose of the park,or in a negative way if they are incompatible.
Activities occurring outside the park and preserve boundary which could
affect resource protection and visitor use include mining,oil and gas
exploration and development,state and federal land disposal and
subsequent future development,transportation development,the
construction of the Susitna hydroelectric project and related utilities,and
future activities on adjacent native lands.None of the potential problems
identified in this section are expected to seriously affect park resources
in the next two years,which is the time frame for land protection
recommendations.Appropriate responses to external influences will be
determined if potential problems materialize,and the "Land Protection
Plan"will be revised every two years to reflect new management needs
and priorities.
The National Park Service will continue to monitor activities in areas
adjacent to the park,to identify factors that might have harmful effects
on the park.Park managers will work with state and borough planning
teams and private individuals to recommend actions that would avoid or
mitigate impacts on park resources.
Mining .Metallic,coal,and limestone deposits and potential oil and gas
reserves lie outside the park and preserve.The Usibelli Mine,operated
by the Usibelli Coal Company,is the only active coal mine in the vicinity
of the park.It currently is the site of extensive surface mining activity
(Plangraphics 1983).The coal is transported by railroad to Fairbanks
and Seward.According to the Alaska Division of Mining,a three-to
four-fold increase in coal mining over the next 10 to 15 years will likely
result from sales to Pacific Rim countries.Park managers foresee no
signficant impacts.
Numerous gold mining claims exist in the Yentna mining district (see the
Regional Influences map).The rising price of gold in the late 1970s
resulted in extensive new claim staking,primarily along Cache Creek,
50
PROPOSED MINCHUMINA BASIN
OIL AND GAS LEASE SALE tf42
upper Peters Creek,and the Kahiltna River,and at Mount Fairview.
Placer mining in this area is not expected to increase substantially over
the next 20 years,but access will be improved (ADNR 1984).The
Matanuska-Susitna Borough is requesting priority consideration for
construction of an all-weather road across the mining district to the
Fairview mountain group in addition to reconstruction of the Petersville
Road.Improved access would serve mining,private land development,
recreation,sport hunting,and fishing,and it would potentially offer
alternative access to the national park for backcountry use.The
Petersville Road vicinity supports the most intense hunting activity in the
area,and increased access by sport hunters might necessitate additional
monitoring during the hunting season to ensure that no sport hunting
occurred within the national park boundary.
Mining claims in the Chulitna mining district are concentrated primarily in
the Dunkle Hills area (inside the park boundary)and from the Golden
Zone Mine on adjoining lands southwesterly for several miles to the
Eldridge Glacier.The Golden Zone Mine has been productive in the past
and currently is being reactivated to the extent of improving access along
the four-wheel-drive road that connects the area with the George Parks
Highway at Colorado Station.The road is not open for public use at
present,but it potentially could offer access for recreationists in the
future.Other claim groups in this area are being actively explored.
Oil and Gas Development .As part of the state's five-year oil and gas
leasing program,the state proposed the lease sale of 960,000 acres in the
Minchumina Basin adjacent to the park and preserve.A notice of delay
has been issued for sale number 42 because of a lack of industry
interest.The sale,originally scheduled for January 1984,may still be
held in the future,although petroleum potential is considered low (ADNR
1984).No federal inland oil and gas lease sales are proposed for the
area adjacent to the park and preserve.
If oil and gas development does occur,the following associated impacts
could result:disruption of traditional subsistence use in and near
Denali,disruption of natural fire processes and consequent damage to
natural wildlife populations,increased costs for managing the
Tanana-Minchumina interagency fire management plan,and new pressures
to build roads,which would alter the lifestyle of present residents and
change the character of the area.
The Yukon Pacific Corporation is currently evaluating the potential for
constructing a gas pipeline from Fairbanks to Anchorage.The pipeline
would be added to the Nenana River transportation and utility corridor,
which parallels the park's eastern boundary.The company would be
required to apply for a right-of-way permit from the Bureau of Land
Management and to complete an environmental impact statement before
approval could be granted to build along federal portions of the pipeline
corridor (BLM 1984).Details and impacts of this proposal are not yet
available,but they would be analyzed thoroughly in the environmental
impact statement.
Federal and State Land Disposal Programs .The Bureau of Land
Management opened approximately 10,000 acres of land adjacent to the
53
park boundary in the Minchumina block to settlement under the Trade and
Manufacturing Site,Homesite,and Headquarters Site Laws.The opening
was to provide settlement opportunities for the general public commencing
in December 1981.Since then many notices of location have been
submitted for the block closest to the park boundary,but only one
location has been field-examined and approved (BLM 1984).The central
Yukon resource management plan,due to be completed in July 1985,will
address this and other BLM land issues in the vicinity of the park.
As part of its land disposal program,the state of Alaska is subdividing
parcels for land settlement.The "Susitna Area Plan"and the "Tanana
Basin Plan,"both in preparation by the Alaska Department of Natural
Resources in cooperation with other agencies,will make recommendations
for classifying state lands and develop policies and guidelines for these
lands.At this point in the planning process,recommendations are being
made to slow the pace of land sales.For example,in the Susitna area
the current pace of disposing of 20,000 to 30,000 acres per year will be
slowed to approximately 7,000 acres per year (ADNR 1984).
Generally the state lands adjacent to the park have been classified for the
primary uses of recreation,habitat protection,and water resource
protection,all of which are compatible with park purposes.Possible
secondary uses of these lands include oil and gas development,which
could potentially interfere with traditional subsistence uses or degrade
natural values within the park.The state plans to dispose of several
parcels within 6 miles of the park and preserve boundary;these lands
are primarily along the George Parks Highway.
Additionally,the National Park Service remains concerned over the
potential for strip development along the George Parks Highway,
particularly in the vicinity of the Riley Creek entrance,and it supports
the implementation of the recommendations in Scenic Resources along the
Parks Highway as a means of avoiding this sort of visually intrusive
development.The study recognizes the outstanding visual quality of the
Riley Creek area and recommends that it remain free of development.
Residential and commercial development will more appropriately remain
concentrated in the McKinley Village area.
Alaska State Park System .The 1982 Southcentral Region Plan outlines
recommendations for Denali State Park over the next 10 years.These
include boundary adjustments,updating the management plan,completing
the trail program and management plan development phases,staffing for
visitor information services at Byers Lake,and reconsidering joint
management agreements with the National Park Service.All of these
recommendations are compatible with the land protection goals of the
National Park Service.
The development of a major visitor activity center on state park lands,as
proposed in the NPS plan for Denali National Park and Preserve,will
consitute a major change in the management of Denali State Park.Future
cooperative planning regarding this proposal is called for in a
memorandum of understanding between the National Park Service and the
Alaska Departments of Natural Resources and of Transportation and Public
Facilities (see appendix E).Cooperation among all concerned agencies
54
will help ensure that future development and use are fully compatible with
the objectives for both the state and the national parks.^.
Recently Denali State Park was opened to hunting.The National Park
Service will continue to work with the state to minimize the effects that
hunting might have on increased recreational use as envisioned in the
general management plan for Denali National Park and Preserve.
Transportation .A demand for access has accompanied the parceling of
state land.Most subdivided parcels are either accessible by air or are
close to existing roads.Future roads will be provided by the borough or
by the Alaska Department of Transportation.Currently there are no
plans for the borough to provide roads in the vicinity of the park other
than in the Petersville area,as described in the mining section.
The potential for state road development is described in the draft
"Interior Alaska Transportation Study"(ADOT 1983).One of the
potential roads identified in the study would go from Healy to McGrath,
with a possible spur road south into Kantishna along the Kantishna
drainage.Another possible road corridor would follow the Stampede Trail
beyond its current terminus to the Kantishna mining area.This latter
road would be 75 miles long,cost approximately $100 million to $150
million to build,and provide access primarily for miners.At present,the
Stampede Trail is passable by most vehicles for the first several miles,
negotiable by four-wheel-drive vehicles for several additional miles,then
deteriorates into a tractor trail.There are no current plans to upgrade
the trail.Further consideration of any roads into Kantishna should await
Congress's decision regarding the status of the Kantishna Hills and would
be subject to more detailed study and environmental compliance.
The state of Alaska has negotiated the transfer of the Alaska Railroad
from the federal government to the state.As a part of the transfer the
Department of the Interior has granted the state a 200-foot easement
along the railroad to be used for "railroad-related purposes."No major
developments other than for railroads may be built in this easement
through the park.
Utility Development .The Alaska Power Authority has submitted an
18-volume license application to the federal Energy Regulatory Commission
for the development of a major hydroelectric project on the Susitna River,
southeast of the park and preserve.Briefly,the project entails
constructing two dams,reservoirs,a permanent townsite,temporary
camps,an access road from the Denali Highway,a railroad link from Gold
Creek,and transmission lines to deliver power to the railbelt.Depending
on the granting of the license,the preparation of an environmental impact
statement,public hearings,and financing,the project is scheduled for
construction beginning in 1987 and reaching a peak in 1990.A work
force of 3,500 could be operating in the area by 1990,quadrupling the
population of Cantwell and doubling the populations of small communities
like Trapper Creek.Visitation to the national park and preserve might
increase with the surge in nearby populations,even though recreational
facilities would be provided within the dam construction area.Traffic
along the George Parks Highway would increase and stimulate additional
commercial development.Competition for fish,wildlife,and other
55
resources would increase,and the rapid growth of Cantwell might affect
the movements of the Denali,Nelchina,and Yanert caribou herds.
Transmission lines would connect with the intertie utility lines currently
under construction,and the number of lines from Willow to Healy,which
are visible from the park,would double.
The Alaska Power Authority has constructed an intertie transmission line
between Willow and Healy that involves erecting 100-foot towers at
1,300-foot intervals along the route shown on the Regional Influences
map.The lines and towers,which pass through the Yanert Valley,are
not visible from the national park entrance.This corridor will be the
defined route for other future utility transmission from Anchorage to
Fairbanks,and the National Park Service will continue to work with the
Alaska Power Authority to mitigate the visual impacts of any future
development along the Parks Highway and the park boundary.
Adjacent Native Lands .Doyon does not currently intend to develop the
Telida tract of native land west of the preserve,and the corporation will
promote subsistence use of the area.Further west on the Nikolai tract,
studies have indicated,there is potential for developing coal for
liquefaction.The future development of the coal deposits might influence
transportation systems in the region.
Ahtna is developing a placer mining operation on Valdez Creek east of the
park boundary,but otherwise it is not pursuing major developments in
the vicinity of the park and preserve.
Cook Inlet Region does not intend to select lands in the vicinity of the
park,at least not until native village selections have been made.At
present,small native villages in this area are applying for group status
to enable them to select lands.Potential uses of these lands if they were
eventually selected would likely be limited to subsistence,but they could
include mineral and commercial development.
Sociocultural Characteristics
Denali National Park is primarily a natural area,and the sociocultural
resources are directly linked to the natural features.Native and white
subsistence users in the areas added by ANILCA continue time-honored
traditional hunting and trapping lifestyles.In many cases these people
have trapping cabins or have applied for lands used in their ancestral
hunting areas.These lands are for the most part in the northern
additions near Lake Minchumina.Also included are three cemetery sites
near these traditional lands.
PROTECTION ALTERNATIVES
The following alternatives would offer some degree of protection to the
park's nonfederal lands.Each alternative is analyzed with respect to its
application,sociocultural impacts,and potential effectiveness in land
protection.The alternatives considered include regulations,cooperative
agreements,the Alaska Land Bank,coordination with other agencies,
56
zoning,less-than-fee acquisitions (easements),and fee simple acquisition
Any of these alternatives could be used singly or in combination.
Regulations
The following federal and state laws and authorities provide some
protection for park resources.
Mining operations within the park are addressed by the Mining in
the Parks Act of 1976 (16 USC 21-54)and its implementing
regulations (35 CFR 9A).The regulations intend to minimize
resource impacts by requiring operations to adhere to an approved
plan of operations.Operations are monitored by NPS staff for
compliance.
All private resource development activities on private,state,and
federal lands must meet applicable state and federal environmental
protection standards.These standards are cooperatively enforced
by the Alaska Departments of Environmental Conservation and
Natural Resources,the Environmental Protection Agency,and the
National Park Service.Air quality must meet the standards for a
class I area as established in the Clean Air Act amendments (42 USC
7401 et seq.)In Alaska the state's water quality standards are more
restrictive than the EPA standards,and they are enforced by the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.
Section 1104 of ANILCA specifies the procedure for reviewing
requests for rights-of-way for any transportation or utility system
across public lands,and it establishes the criteria for approving or
disapproving such requests.The access provision of section 1110 of
ANILCA assures private landowners that they will be given "such
rights as may be necessary to assure adequate and feasible access
for economic and other purposes to the concerned lands,"subject to
reasonable regulations to protect park values.
The Alaska Anadromous Fish Act (Stat.16.05.870)provides
protection to specific rivers,lakes,and streams or parts of them
that are important for the spawning,rearing or migration of
anadromous fish.Bear-Paw River and its tributaries are on the list
of specific rivers that are protected by this act.The act requires
that any person or governmental agency desiring to construct a
hydraulic project,to use,divert,obstruct,pollute,or change the
natural flow or bed of a specified river,lake,or stream,or to use
wheeled,tracked,or excavating equipment or log-dragging
equipment in the bed of a specified river,lake,or stream must
notify the commissioner of this intention before beginning the
construction or use.
Application .Regulations cannot usually provide for public use,but they
can prevent harm to natural or cultural resources.For example,federal,
state,and local regulations often impose strict limits on dredging or
filling of wetlands that would destroy wildlife habitat or degrade water
quality.It is much more difficult for regulations to absolutely prohibit
57
an activity than to simply limit the type,amount,or intensity of the
activity.
Sociocultural Impacts .Regulations may prevent individual landowners
from using their land in some manner,but this restriction on individual
freedom is imposed for the benefit of the community as a whole.The
impact can be regarded as beneficial to the public at large.
Effectiveness .In parks where the impact of development is already
evident,regulations are more likely to be effective in reducing adverse
effects of major projects.In relatively pristine areas,regulations may be
of little use in efforts to preserve natural systems from any intrusions of
development.Regulations also are more likely to be effective where there
is a good base of information about the impacts of certain activities on
park resources.
Cooperative Agreements
Application .Agreements are written descriptions of how two or more
parties will take certain actions.Agreements can provide for the
exchange or transfer of services,funds,or benefits.Some of the
elements that could be addressed in an agreement for land protection
include
access for resource management activities
interpretive services
routine maintenance or restoration of structures
law enforcement
joint review of permit applications
enforcement of environmental protection laws
Advantages of agreements include their flexibility,relative low cost,and
ability to establish cooperative management arrangements.Disadvantages
include the ability of one party to terminate on short notice and lack of
permanent protection.
Sociocultural Impacts .Specific impacts are defined by the terms of the
agreement.Since agreements allow current uses to continue and all
parties have to agree to the terms,negative or adverse impacts are
unlikely.
Effectiveness .Agreements are likely to be most effective for land owned
by entities other than individuals.These include state or local
governments,private nonprofit organizations,federal agencies,and
corporations.Agreements are more likely to be workable with these
groups than with individuals because organizations often have the
necessary resources (staff,equipment,money)to make an agreement
worth considering in the first place and to carry out the terms of the
agreement over a long period of time.
Cooperative agreements are appropriate when both parties have similar or
compatible management objectives.They can be used as interim
protective measures when long-term goals cannot be immediately achieved.
58
The expenditure of federal funds to provide permanent facilities is
generally prohibited under short-term cooperative agreements.
Alaska Land Bank
ANILCA (section 907)established an Alaska Land Bank program to
provide legal and economic benefits to native landowners and to provide
for the maintenance of land in its natural condition,particularly where
these nonfederal lands relate to conservation system units.Land bank
agreements may contain provisions such as the landowner's responsibility
to manage land in a manner compatible with the planned management of
the park.The superintendent's responsibility is also defined.It may
include technical and other assistance such as fire management,trespass
control,resource and land use planning,and other services,with or
without reimbursement as agreed upon by the parties involved.Native
corporation lands (but not native allotments or small patented tracts)are
immune from adverse possession,real property taxes,and assessments
when included in the land bank.They are also immune from judgment in
any action of law or equity to recover sums owed or penalties incurred by
any native corporation or group or any officer,director,or stockholder
of the corporation or group.Land bank agreements are particularly
important in cooperating with native corporations that own large tracts of
land in and adjacent to the preserve.Sociocultural impacts and
effectiveness are essentially the same as cooperative agreements.
Coordination with Other Agencies
Actions by federal and local agencies to permit,license,or provide
financial assistance for a project might have significant impacts on park
resources.Under provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act,
major federal actions are subject to public review processes to ensure
adequate consideration of possible impacts on the environment.As a
concerned land manager and neighbor,the park superintendent can
ensure that other agencies are fully aware of any impacts proposed
actions might have on park resources.Participation in public hearings
and review processes is one means of expressing park concerns.
Coordination also might be improvech by memoranda of understanding or
advance requests to agencies that the park be notified when certain
actions are being considered.Participation by the park staff in project
or permit review processes encourages compatible designs,locations,and
operating requirements for new construction.
Zoning
The Matanuska-Susitna Borough encompasses lands in the southern
portion of the park and preserve.No zoning regulations have been
applied,but they may be in the future,based on the area's proximity to
Anchorage and Fairbanks and its potential for residential and commercial
growth.
59
Easements
Landownership may be envisioned as a package of rights.Easements
convey only some of those rights from one owner to another,while the
other rights of ownership remain unchanged.Easements can be positive
(such as conveying a right of access)or negative (such as limiting
specific uses of the land).
Application .Easements are most likely to be useful under the following
conditions:
Some,but not all,existing or potential private uses are compatible
with park purposes.
Current owners desire to continue current types of use and
occupancy of the land under conditions conveyed to the National
Park Service.
Protection of scenic values or provision of access for the public or
the Park Service is needed only over a portion of the land.
Specific easement terms can be constructed to fit the topography,
vegetation,visibility,and character of existing or potential developments
on each tract.Easement provisions to protect park resources may
address the following points:clearing of vegetation;location and design
of new access roads and utilities;density,height,design,and color in
developments visible to the public;and access for management of natural
and cultural resources.
Sociocultural Impacts .Individual and collective impacts will vary
depending on the rights acquired.In most cases an easement continues
the current conditions while compensating the owner for the loss of
potential uses.
The development of specific easement terms for large tracts requires some
detailed site planning to identify the most environmentally sensitive areas
and those where development could be accommodated with minimal impacts.
The development of specific easement terms can be a cooperative effort to
ensure that development follows traditional land use patterns or avoids
any unnecessary disturbance of the natural system.
Effectiveness .Because easements are enforceable interests in property,
they provide greater assurance of permanent protection than do
agreements or zoning ordinances.Easements "run with the land"and are
binding on future owners.Advantages of easements include
continued private ownership and use subject to the terms of the
easement
lower initial acquisition costs than fee,and potential to protect more
land
reduced impact on local property taxes
reduced costs for NPS operations and maintenance
60
Disadvantages of easements as compared to fee include
potential difficulty in enforcement of easement terms
unfamiliarity of landowners with less-than-fee ownership
relatively high costs of acquisition on undeveloped properties where
no further development is compatible
increased costs of monitoring the terms and conditions of easement
provisions
Fee Acquisition
When all of the interests in land are acquired,it is owned in fee simple.
Application .Fee acquisition may be recommended when other methods of
protection have been found to be inadequate,inefficient,or ineffective to
meet management needs.Fee acquisition is most often appropriate under
the following conditions:
The land is needed for development of park facilities or heavy public
use.
The land must be maintained in a pristine natural condition,which
precludes reasonable private use.
The owner does not wish to sell less-than-fee interest.
The land cannot be protected in accord with park purposes by other
methods,or alternatives would not be cost-effective.
Sociocultural Impacts .This alternative has great potential for significant
change in the life of an individual or community.Unless use and
occupancy are reserved,residential dislocations result from acquisition.
Effectiveness .Fee-simple acquisition is the most effective and secure
land protection alternative.Generally,it is also the most expensive form
of land protection.Advantages of fee acquisition include
permanent and complete NPS control over use of the land
provision for public access and access by management
ability to develop necessary facilities
familiarity to landowners
opportunity for continued private use under reservations of use and
occupancy
61
Disadvantages of fee acquisition include
initial acquisition costs
maintenance and management requirements,especially for developed
properties
impacts on local community from the relocation of a previous owner
or the removal of housing from the local market
Methods of Acquisition
There are four primary methods of acquisition of fee and less-than-fee
interests in lands:donation,purchase,exchange,and relinquishment.
Donation .Landowners may be motivated to donate their lands or
interests in land to achieve conservation objectives.The tax benefits of
donation also may be an important incentive.Donations of fee are
deductible from taxable income.Easement donations also may provide
deductions from taxable income,but they are subject to certain IRS
requirements to qualify as a charitable contribution.Landowners are
encouraged to consult their qualified tax advisors to discuss the specific
advantages of donations.NPS representatives may be able to provide
some general examples of tax advantages,but they cannot provide tax
advice or commitments of what deductions will be allowed by the IRS.
Exchange .Lands or interests in land may be acquired by exchange.
The land to be exchanged must be located within Alaska and must be of
approximately equal value.Differences in value may be resolved by
making cash payments.The National Park Service will consider other
federal lands within the authorized boundary as potential exchange lands
to consolidate NPS jurisdiction over more manageable units.
Other federal lands in Alaska that become surplus to agency needs would
normally go through disposition procedures,including public sale.The
National Park Service will work with the Bureau of Land Management and
the General Services Administration to determine if any additional federal
land may be available for exchange purposes.
Purchase.Acquisition by purchase requires funds to be appropriated by
Congress or donated from private sources.Further funding for
purchases depends primarily on future appropriations.Potential
donations of funds or purchases by individuals or organizations interested
in holding land for conservation purposes will be encouraged.
Relinquishment .State and native corporation lands under application may
be relinquished,in which case ownership remains with the United States.
The relinquishing entity can utilize the acreage being relinquished to
acquire other lands outside the unit.
62
RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommended land protection approaches for nonfederal land are
discussed below.Information about specific tracts--owners,acreages,
minimum interest needed for protection,justification,proposed method of
acquisition,and priority--is included in appendix I.In instances where
acquisition of land or an interest in land is recommended,exchange or
donation is a preferred method in all cases;it may also be attractive to
private owners in certain tax situations.Purchase with appropriated or
donated funds,bargain sales,and leaseback/sellback are other
possibilities.Where purchase is necessary,every effort will be made to
reach an agreement with the owner.However,eminent domain could be
used in emergencies to prevent land use activities that would severely
damage the park's integrity or to clear title.
The use of patented mining claims for new visitor facilities would conflict
with the objective of the general management plan to reduce the traffic in
the road corridor (refer to the discussion of visitor use and general
development in the "General Management Plan"section of this document).
The existing recreational uses of private properties in the Kantishna area
are considered compatible;however,additional recreational use and
facility development in this portion of the park would generate additional
traffic on the park road and increase the problem of avoidance behavior
by wildlife.To avoid this potential for adverse effects,the National Park
Service will seek to acquire,through purchase,donation,or exchange,
the surface estates to the mining properties to preclude large-scale
recreational development.This action will allow mining activity to
continue according to applicable laws and regulations (see appendix A).
The National Park Service will use existing authorities to minimize the
adverse effects of ongoing mining activities.Validity determinations for
unpatented claims will be completed as quickly as feasible to determine
status.Wherever new mining activity might introduce development into a
previously undisturbed area,the National Park Service will acquire the
mineral properties in fee title,through donation,exchange,or purchase.
The National Park Service will seek a land exchange with the state of
Alaska,or a relinquishment by the state,to place the "wolf townships"
inside the northeast park boundary.These lands were recognized by
Cong!?ss as important habitat for park caribou and wolf populations,and
they are also used by park bears and moose.Acquisition of these
townships is needed to protect the natural ranges of these populations
from incompatible development and sport hunting.Specific concerns for
the wolf townships are that the Savage wolf pack populations have
dropped drastically in recent years and also that wintering caribou are
particularly sensitive to human disturbances (NPS,Singer and Beattie
1984).Adding the wolf townships to the park would complete the habitat
and range protection of the Toklat and Savage wolf packs and the
wintering caribou herd,removing them from sport hunting pressure.
This exchange or relinquishment of approximately 95,000 acres is fully
supported by the state of Alaska and is a recommendation of the draft
"Tanana Basin Plan"(ADNR 1984).Lands involved are primarily state
lands which recently have been excluded from the state land disposal
63
program.A total of 41 small tract entries (206 acres total)have been
patented by the state from previous small tract sales,and these will not
be included in the exchange or relinquishment.Uses on these lands,
which are primarily recreational,will be monitored for any adverse
impacts on wildlife within the new park boundary.The lands also include
Eight-Mile Lake and portions of the Stampede Trail.
The secretary of the interior is authorized to acquire by donation or
exchange available state lands contiguous to the park boundary by
notifying Congress of this intention.If acquisition of these townships is
possible only through an exchange,the National Park Service will
consider exchanging certain lands of approximately equal acreage and
value.Congressional approval is required to increase or decrease the
total amount of land within the boundary by more than 23,000 acres.
The state intends to leave the wolf townships open to mineral entry and
coal prospecting and leasing.However,the National Park Service
recommends the exclusion of these lands from mineral entry until they are
acquired by the federal government.Once the area is within the
boundaries of the national park,it will be closed to mineral entry.
The national park and preserve boundary will be adjusted to follow
natural geographic and hydrographic features wherever possible.The
National Park Service proposes that much of the western boundary follow
the Swift Fork River.Placing the boundary along this natural barrier to
the spread of fire will greatly enhance the fire protection afforded to
state and native lands,consistent with the "Tanana-Minchumina
Interagency Fire Management Plan."In addition,the inclusion of these
lands within Denali will offer added protection to an area of significant
caribou habitat,based on 1984 caribou surveys,which indicated use of an
area immediately east of the Swift Fork by as many as 200 to 300 caribou.
If made part of the preserve,the area will still be subject to both sport
and subsistence hunting.
Other areas of federal parkland identified for possible exchange with the
state include fragments of small river valleys,such as the Tokositna,
which are only partially inside the southern park boundary.Deletion of
these valley segments from the national park will simplify the description
of legal hunting areas and provide easily identifiable boundaries for
sportsmen and others.The recommended boundary redesignation will also
exclude one headquarters site and two trade and manufacturing sites from
the national park boundary.Since sport hunting will then be allowed in
this area now closed to hunting,landowners could realize economic
benefits from guiding or other services.
The National Park Service will not seek to include the Chelatna Lake area
within Denali National Park and Preserve.Congress recognized that this
area was potentially valuable for recreational use and access to the south
side of Denali.However,the current proposal for south-side development
and use,which focuses on the Ruth Glacier,can be implemented without
federal land management in the Chelatna Lake area.
The National Park Service strongly urges the state to establish buffer
zones between developable parcels and parklands to facilitate fire
64
SWIFT FORK RIVER
JrA''"*-TOKOSITNA
'*""V"^'VER VALLEY.
!PETEJ*.^MLLE
\%.
TAUtETW^
("S
AREAS TO BE ADDED THROUGH EXCHANGE
J
AREAS TO BE DELETED THROUGH EXCHANGE
]ACQUIRE SURFACE ESTATES
DENAU NA
PRESERVE
AIRSTRIP
GLACIER
LAND PROTEC TION
Untied Stales Oeparimeni at trie Inieiior
«cIfe&B5,
management,avoid interference with traditional subsistence uses,and
protect wildlife and cultural resource values.Also,for the navigable
portion of the Tokositna River and any rivers determined navigable in the
future,the National Park Service strongly urges the state of Alaska to
disallow activities that would compromise the natural,cultural,scenic,
and recreational values of Denali National Park and Preserve.
The National Park Service will continue to work cooperatively with native
groups in the management of cemetery and historic sites to preserve their
cultural significance regardless of their ownership.
COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS
In accordance with section 910 of ANILCA,proposed actions of the land
protection plan involving land exchanges with village,native,and
regional corporations are excluded from National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)considerations.Other land protection actions which will not
significantly change existing land or visitor use are categorically excluded
from NEPA considerations (516 DM 6,appendix 7.4).Impacts of the
proposed exchange for the state-owned wolf townships have been assessed
and are presented in the Final Environmental Impact Statement ^Kantishna
Hills/Dunkle Mine Study (USDI 1984).
67
WILDERNESS SUITABILITY REVIEW
Congress enacted the Wilderness Act in 1964 "to secure for the American
people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring
resource of wilderness."The act defines wilderness as follows:
A wilderness,in contrast with those areas where man and his
own works dominate the landscape,is hereby recognized as an
area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled
by man,where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.
An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in the Act an
area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval
character and influence,without permanent improvements or
human habitation,which is protected and managed so as to
preserve its natural conditions and which ...generally
appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of
nature,with the imprint of man's works substantially
unnoticeable.
ANILCA,section 701,formally designated approximately 1,900,000 acres of
Denali as wilderness.The area covered by this congressional designation
comprises most of what was Mount McKinley National Park,with the
exception of a buffer zone of 300 feet (90 meters)surrounding each
development,a corridor extending 150 feet (45 meters)from either side of
the centerline of the park road,existing borrow sources and waysides,
and lands east of the railroad right-of-way.The designated wilderness
area will be managed in accordance with the provisions of the Wilderness
Act except for the extraordinary uses allowed by ANILCA because of the
unique conditions in Alaska.For example,section 1110 of ANILCA allows
the use of snowmachines,motorboats,and airplanes for traditional
activities on lands and waters designated as wilderness.Specific closures
to this type of use have been proposed for the road corridor and Wonder
Lake.Section 1315 permits the continuation of existing public use cabins
and the construction of a limited number of new public use cabins or
shelters.Section 1316 allows the continued taking of wildlife where such
use existed prior to ANILCA.However,since all hunting was already
prohibited in the old Mount McKinley National Park,it will continue to be
prohibited in the designated wilderness.
Section 1317 of ANILCA requires a wilderness review to determine the
suitability or nonsuitability of federal lands within Denali National Park
and Preserve for eventual designation as wilderness.Any
recommendations forthcoming from this review are to be submitted to
Congress by December 2,1987.A preliminary analysis has been
accomplished.The analysis accounted for such factors as lands needed to
serve visitors now and in the future,the land status of those areas
added by ANILCA,existing and potential mineral activities,lands needed
for operation of the park and preserve,and the locations of improved and
regularly used roads.
Those areas determined to qualify for wilderness designation are shown on
the Wilderness Suitability map.This map represents only a preliminary
analysis,and a final recommendation could change certain boundaries.
69
Lands in other than full federal ownership are ineligible for wilderness
designation.The park road corridor and the Ruth Glacier are also
ineligible because of the nature of the visitor use proposed for these
areas.
If additional lands are acquired by the federal government,as discussed
in the "Land Protection Plan,"they will be studied for wilderness
suitability.Conversely,any lands deleted from federal ownership will no
longer be eligible for wilderness designation.
The areas determined suitable for wilderness designation combined with
the areas already designated amount to approximately 95 percent of the
park complex.Managing these lands according to the criteria of the
Wilderness Act and ANILCA will provide additional protection to the Denali
environment by precluding large-scale development and the attendant
disturbance of wildlife and other resources.At the same time,formal
designation of preserve lands will not prohibit or otherwise restrict sport
hunting,fishing,trapping,or traditional subsistence activities.Nor will
wilderness designation of the park additions affect traditional subsistence
use in these areas.
Regardless of this suitability review or any subsequent National Park
Service proposal,wilderness can be designated only by Congress,and
any subsequent change in the status and management of designated areas
can also be accomplished only by Congress.In the interim those lands
considered suitable for designation as wilderness will be managed in
accordance with the provisions of the Wilderness Act and the special
provisions for Alaska conveyed by ANILCA.
Following analysis of public response on this suitability review,the
National Park Service will make a wilderness proposal to the secretary of
the interior,who will in turn make a recommendation regarding wilderness
designation to the president and Congress.As required in ANILCA,the
president is to make his recommendations prior to December 2,1987.
70
.^lyStTWEL^
I—1—.
J
pr-L/
>--
'\,
\
(^
'\
t
LTAU-^ETNA
SUITABLE FOR WILDERNESS DESIGNATION
DESIGNATED WILDERNESS
AIRSTRIP
GLACIER
WILDERNESS
SUITABILITY
PART TWO
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
INTRODUCTION
This "Environmental Assessment"analyzes the environmental consequences
of the proposed actions to determine if there would be any impacts on the
environment.Subsequent review will identify the significance of any
environmental impacts,and the conclusions will be presented either in a
finding of no significant impact or a notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
Alternatives for this project focused on two major visitor use and
development issues:(1)the most appropriate level of use for the north
road corridor,and (2)whether or not a major visitor service and activity
center should be established on the south side of Denali.Two
alternatives were assessed:(A)continue present management with no
south-side development,and (B)develop the south side and reduce
vehicle use and camping along the north road corridor.Alternative B
was selected as the preferred alternative and is presented as the draft
general management plan in part one of this document.
This document also contains an assessment of the impacts of mining
authorized by applicable law and regulation in the Kantishna Hills area.
A range of mineral management strategies was considered in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement ,Kantishna Hills /Dunkle Mine Study ,
which was prepared for the Alaska Land Use Council by an interagency
work group (USDI 1984).The alternatives are not repeated in this
document.The Land Use Council proposal,which calls for additional
mineral development activity in the Kantishna Hills district,is presented
as the preferred alternative in the 1984 FEIS.
75
ALTERNATIVES
ALTERNATIVE A:CONTINUE PRESENT MANAGEMENT WITH NO
SOUTH-SIDE DEVELOPMENT
Visitor Use and General Development
Under this alternative the National Park Service would not take any
concerted action to implement a south-side activity center.All
development necessary to accommodate visitors would remain consolidated
along the park road corridor on the north side of the park.Facilities
would be rehabilitated and upgraded to support wildlife viewing,
overnight camping,and backcountry use,as proposed in the 1983
Development Concept Plan .The intent of all actions would be to
reinforce existing conditions,and nothing would be done that would
represent extensive new development or a new management direction.
The existing level of development along the park road corridor and the
level proposed in the 1983 development plan are compared in table 3.
Table 3:Changes in Development,1983 Development Concept Plan
Site Existing Conditions 1983 DCP
Riley Creek 102 campsites Add 50-100 campsites,
construct interpretive center,
construct camping support
facilities
Hotel 120 double rooms Replace with new facility at
21 single rooms same capacity
Savage River 29 campsites Possible expansion
Sanctuary 7 campsites No change in capacity
Teklanika 50 campsites Add 45 walk-in sites
2 group campsites
Igloo 7 campsites No change in capacity
Eielson Visitor Viewing shelters.Construct expanded facility
Center information,exhibits,
and sales
Wonder Lake 20 campsites Relocate at same capacity
An increase in campsites at Riley Creek and Teklanika would increase the
demand for shuttle bus service beyond Savage River by approximately six
76
buses a day,assuming that all the campers would ride the shuttle bus
either to get to their campsites or to see other areas of the park.This
increase in bus use would increase total vehicle traffic by about 5
percent.Further increases in the demand for shuttle bus transportation
would be associated with the future development of campgrounds and
hotels outside the park.Park managers would be under considerable
pressure to increase transportation services to meet this demand,which
could result in the number of vehicles increasing by an additional 4
percent per year (see the "Environmental Consequences"section for a
more detailed discussion of probable traffic increases).
Resource Management
Research would be conducted to gain a better understanding of the
complex forces at work in the environment.The specific studies are
described in detail in the park's current "Natural Resource Management
Plan"and are summarized in the "General Management Plan"section of
this document.
Mining on valid existing claims is authorized in the park subject to
applicable laws and regulations.Unless Congress enacted new legislation
governing mineral development in the Kantishna Hills,the levels of placer
and lode mining would be expected to remain fairly constant for the next
10 years.The current level of mineral development is described in detail
in the Final Environmental Impact Statement ,Kantishna Hills /Dunkle Mine
Study (USDI 1984).There are currently 292 active claims in the district,
covering approximately 2,250 acres.Operations include placer mining for
gold and silver and small-scale lode mining for gold,silver,and
antimony.The claims would continue to be accessible by the existing
park road.In 1983 mining-related traffic on the road amounted to an
average of 270 round trips per month,and this level of mining-related
traffic would be expected to continue.Mining operations would continue
to be subject to federal regulations (36 CFR 9A)intended to protect park
values by requiring approved plans of operations.
Park Operations
No substantive change in staffing or workspace would be undertaken.A
wildlife biologist would be added to the park staff to closely monitor the
effects of visitor use on the wildlife populations north of the Alaska
Range.
ALTERNATIVE B (PROPOSAL):DEVELOP A VISITOR SERVICE AND
ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND REDUCE PRIVATE
VEHICLE USE AND CAMPING ALONG THE NORTH ROAD
This alternative was selected as the proposal and is described in detail in
the "General Management Plan"section of this document.It is
summarized below for purposes of comparison with alternative A.
77
Visitor Use and General Development
Alternative B suggests that in addition to the wildlife-viewing experience
along the north park road corridor,an entirely different experience
focused on mountains,glaciers,and outdoor recreation would be provided
on the south side of Denali.The south-side proposal would involve joint
government and private commercial development on both national park and
state park lands,and it would require extensive cooperation between the
National Park Service,the state of Alaska,and private enterprise.Once
the general management plan was approved,all of the involved agencies
and individuals would work together to accomplish specific feasibility
studies,development proposals,environmental analyses,and cooperative
management agreements.
The central feature of the south-side development would be a visitor
service and activity center and lodging complex.The staff would offer a
variety of informational,trip-planning,interpretive,and recreational
services and programs designed for visitors having a broad cross section
of sightseeing,recreational,and educational interests.Additionally,the
center would serve as a point for trip planning and arrangements for
scenic overflights,ground and river trips in the state and national
parks,and fly-ins to outlying mountain huts,dramatic viewpoints,and
remote trailheads.This would greatly expand opportunities for visitors
to enter the mountain realm.Such a visitor center and variety of
activities and experiences in the heart of Alaska,relatively close to
Anchorage and Fairbanks by highway,would offer visitors an alternative
destination and add a new dimension to Alaska tourism in general.
The visitor activity center would be developed on state park lands.
Areas of the national park would be accessible from the center primarily
by air.A system of trails and up to four mountain huts would be
developed inside the national park to facilitate visitor use.Other
camping and hiking opportunities would be available along the George
Parks Highway,at other sites in Denali State Park,and along the
existing primitive roads in the Peters and Dutch hills.
To prevent increasing avoidance behavior by wildlife on the north side of
the park,traffic along the existing park road would initially be held to
within 15 percent,more or less,df the 1984 traffic levels.Once the
south-side activity center was operational,the Teklanika,Igloo,and
Sanctuary campgrounds (64 sites)would be removed,thus eliminating the
need for an estimated 33 vehicles per day,or 23 percent of the total
traffic on the park road.This estimate assumes one vehicle per campsite
(and one bus for each of the two group sites)and that each party
spends two days in the park (one round trip every two days per site).
The reduction in private vehicles would help to reduce avoidance behavior
by wildlife.For the same reason that camping would be reduced in the
road corridor,the National Park Service would oppose new private
commercial development of campgrounds or accommodations on patented
mining claims in the Kantishna Hills.Such development would be avoided
by acquiring the surface estates to patented claims in the Kantishna area.
Shuttle and tour bus transportation would be allowed to increase by
approximately 2 percent per year (or 20 percent over the 10-year life of
78
the plan)to serve day visitors and backcountry users.This increase
would be more than offset by the decrease in private vehicle traffic.
There would be an overall net decrease in traffic of 17 percent over the
life of the plan.
The north-side road corridor would be managed primarily as a daytime
wildlife viewing area and an access route for backcountry hiking and
backpacking.Campgrounds would remain at Riley Creek,Savage River,
and Wonder Lake.As described for alternative A,interpretive services
would be improved,a new visitor access center and interpretive waysides
would be installed,and the hotel would be replaced at Riley Creek.
Resource Management
As in alternative A,the resource management program would involve
extensive studies to improve the understanding of the complex
environment at Denali.The level of placer and lode mining in the
Kantishna Hills would be expected to remain fairly constant for the next
10 years,the same as in alternative A.
Park Operations
The park headquarters would remain at its present location on the north
side.This alternative would require an additional management presence
on the south side of the park.Up to 12 employees would be stationed on
the south side to conduct such activities as maintenance,interpretation,
and ranger services.This staff would require development of necessary
support facilities,including administration buildings,maintenance and
storage facilities,and housing.Development of these facilities would be
undertaken in cooperation with the state of Alaska,outside the national
park boundaries.
79
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The "Environmental Consequences"section addresses impacts on
environmental components as a result of implementing either alternative A
(present management)or alternative B (proposed general management
plan).The principal environmental components addressed in this section
are
moose,caribou,bear,Dall sheep,and wolf
vegetation
fish
water quality
air quality
archeological and historical resources
subsistence use of resources
park visitors and regional tourism
scenic quality
wilderness values
The primary source of information for the environmental impacts of
mineral development was the Final Environmental Impact Statement ,
Kantishna Hills /Dunkle Mine Study (USDI 1984).The primary source of
impacts related to visitor use and development on the north side of the
park was the Development Concept Plan for the park road corridor (NPS
1983).
The south-side proposals have been addressed only generally in this
document for several reasons.First,the visitor service and activity
center would be developed in Denali State Park,and the details about
locations,sizes,and capacities have not been determined.Second,
resource data for the south side of Denali are limited.What information
exists is general in nature.No detailed vegetation,soil,or wildlife maps
exist for the area.The discussion of impacts has been developed
primarily from the personal knowledge of the park staff and not from
written or published information.The collection and analysis of resource
information will occur in subsequent stages of planning.Additional
National Environmental Policy Act compliance will be accomplished once
more detailed proposals and adequate resource data are available.The
focus of the evaluation at that time will be the alternatives for
implementing the concept rather than whether or not a south-side
development should be pursued.
ALTERNATIVE A:CONTINUE PRESENT MANAGEMENT WITH NO
SOUTH-SIDE DEVELOPMENT
Impacts on Moose,Caribou,Bear,Dall Sheep,and Wolf
Activities Affecting Wildlife Populations .Activities that would affect
wildlife would include vehicle driving,camping,and facility development
in the park road corridor and mining in the Kantishna Hills and Dunkle
Mine areas.
80
During the 1984 season,from the last week in May to the first week in
September,road traffic amounted to approximately 12,000 vehicles,
including both buses and automobiles.Under this alternative,traffic
would be expected to increase by 5 percent as a result of campground
expansion inside the park and by an unquantifiable additional amount each
year as a result of private commercial development outside the park.It
was estimated that the new campsites at Riley Creek and Teklanika would
increase the vehicle travel beyond Savage River by five to six shuttle
buses per day.This estimate assumed that all the occupants of 145 new
campsites (435 people)would ride the shuttle bus at least once during a
two-night stay in the park.
The amount of new campsites and hotel rooms that would be built outside
the park over the 10-year life of the plan cannot be projected with
certainty,but it would be expected to considerably exceed development
inside the park.Between 1981 and 1985,102 new campsites and 168 new
hotel rooms were completed by private developers outside the park.If
this trend continued,accommodations would increase by 60 to 70 units per
year.This number of new units would accommodate up to 200 people per
day,who would require up to five additional shuttle buses or tour buses
per day to transport them into the park.If transportation services were
increased to meet the continuously growing demand,the cumulative effect
would be the addition of five buses per day per year,or 50 additional
buses per day by the end of the 10-year planning period.Added to the
number of additional buses associated with NPS campground development
(five to six per day)the total increase in traffic would be 55-56 buses
per day,or a 45 percent increase in total traffic by 1994.
Current mineral development activity on existing claims in the Kantishna
Hills and Dunkle Mine areas includes placer mining of gold and silver and
limited small-scale lode mining of silver,gold,and antimony.The
recorded placer and load mining claims encompass about 12,600 acres,of
which about 750 acres are patented.Details of current levels of mineral
development and mining techniques are contained in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement,Kantishna Hills /Dunkle Mine Study (USD
I
1984).
Moose .A natural,largely unhunted population of moose provides unique
opportunities for research,photography,and observation.The number
of vel,[jles used to view this wildlife increased by 50 percent in the last
decade and resulted in altering this viewing opportunity.The Singer and
Beattie 1984 study of wildlife disturbance along the park road corridor
indicates that between 1973 and 1983 moose sightings dropped by 72
percent,reflecting stronger avoidance reactions by moose than by any of
the other large mammals of Denali.However,it was also observed that
moose spent more time closer to the road in 1983 than they did in 1973,
suggesting habituation by some individuals.
Moose avoided the road less when screened from vehicles by vegetation.
Therefore,roadside vegetation removal during road rehabilitation would
cause moose to move away from the road until the rapidly growing
vegetation,such as alder and willow,revegetated the area.
81
Habitat lost as a result of new facility development along the road
corridor would total approximately 69.5 acres and consist primarily of
white spruce and quaking aspen (specific proposals and impacts are
described under "Impacts on Vegetation").This particular habitat is not
particularly important to moose.Damage or loss would be partially offset
by revegetation and landscaping at the proposed visitor center and the
depot,and by natural recovery of some currently occupied land.
Continued placer mining would result in disturbance of about 2,250 acres
of large mammal habitat in the western Kantishna Hills (floodplains,
upland forests,and uplands)and about 20 acres in the Dunkle Mine area
(mostly scrubland),or about 1.2 percent and 0.1 percent of the
respective mining study areas.Additional habitat loss would result from
developing new mining trails within placer claim boundaries in the
Kantishna Hills.Both mining districts overlap important wildlife habitat.
The Kantishna Hills contain some of the largest moose populations in the
park.Moose are the only species that would be seriously affected by
this loss of habitat.Reductions in moose populations have been observed
in areas where placer mining has disturbed streamside habitat.A
comparative analysis of moose pellet grcwjps found moose to be 15 times
more plentiful in unmined areas than in mined areas.
Equipment and vehicle noise and human /activity might cause some moose
to avoid mining areas in the Kantishna Hills.It is estimated that 270
vehicle round trips per month serve the mining area during the 100-day
summer activity season,and that a maximum of 133 people live there
during the summer.That level of activity would be expected to continue
under this alternative.Poaching or subsistence hunting could adversely
affect moose populations in the Kantishna Hills area.
Conclusion:Implementation of this alternative could result in a 45
percent increase in vehicle traffic over the 10-year life of the plan.
Based on the previous decade of reduced moose sightings it can be
expected that moose would avoid the road corridor to a greater extent.
Mineral developments and the loss of over 2,000 acres of habitat would
continue to significantly affect moose populations in the Kantishna Hills
area.Impacts resulting from habitat loss along the road corridor as well
as poaching loss would not be expected to significantly affect moose
populations.
Caribou .At the present time,the Denali caribou herd is the 13th largest
of 22 herds in Alaska.Because of its accessibility,the herd is also the
most easily viewed and photographed in Alaska.The Denali caribou herd
is also significant because it provides unique opportunities for the study
of predator-prey relationships within a relatively untouched subarctic
ecosystem.The Denali herd has declined in size from 20,000-30,000
animals between 1910 and 1940 to its present size of 2,600,which is now
only 5-6 percent of the earlier recorded population.The herd has shown
a recent upward trend during a period when several other nearby
depressed herds are also increasing.Nevertheless,because of the
present small size,disturbance of the Denali herd should be avoided,
because when caribou herds are at low levels,some traditions,timing of
events,and movements may be weaker and more easily disrupted (Klein
1980).
82
According to Tracy and Dean (1977),the frequency of summer vehicle
traffic on the Denali park road in 1974,two years after the shuttle
system was implemented,was high enough to affect the activity patterns
of large mammals,particularly caribou,within 600 feet of the park road.
Cow/calf groups,which move along the park road in large numbers
between late June and early July,were more sensitive to road disturbance
than were mature bulls.The study concluded that implementation of the
shuttle bus system reduced the disturbances to wildlife by decreasing the
volume of traffic and by controlling visitor behavior.
Singer and Beattie (1984)concluded that between 1973 and 1983 caribou
sightings did not decline;indeed,caribou were observed closer to the
road in 1983 than they were in 1973.Habituation of some caribou was
attributed to the predictability of traffic along the road.It was noted
that avoidance behavior increased if private vehicles stopped and the
occupants got out and approached the wildlife on foot.Different types of
vehicles on the road did not seem to be a factor affecting avoidance
behavior.Wildlife reactions to cars,buses,trucks,and heavy
construction equipment all appeared to be the same.However,it was
concluded that a greater degree of disturbance occurred to wildlife when
passengers left their private vehicles to approach and photograph the
animals.
The loss of about 70 acres of primarily white spruce and quaking aspen
would not significantly adversely affect caribou because it is not normally
preferred habitat.
The segment of the corridor between Toklat and Eielson is part of the
migration route followed by the Denali caribou herd when it moves west in
late June and July.The animals pass through some particularly narrow
areas where the road also passes.To mitigate impacts on caribou,bus
drivers are instructed not to discharge passengers within this area
during migration periods.Road repair and maintenance operations also
avoid this area during migration.
The inclusion of the wolf townships in the park would increase protection
for the Denali caribou herd by eliminating the potential for incompatible
development of important habitat areas and by eliminating sport hunting.
No mining-related impacts on caribou in the Kantishna Hills area were
identified in the Final Environmental Impact Statement ,Kantishna
Hills /Dunkle Mine Study (USDI 1984).However,the loss of 2,250 acres
of habitat might affect some segments of the population.
The Dunkle Mine area is part of the Cantwell calving ground,portions of
which are some of the most significant calving areas used by the Denali
caribou herd (NPS,Duff and Singer 1982a).Groups of mostly cows
arrive at the calving area in mid-May and usually leave by mid-July.
Some evidence indicates that calf survival is greater at the Cantwell
calving ground than at the Wonder Lake or Stampede areas.From 1974 to
1982 approximately 34-51 percent of the entire Denali herd utilized the
area during either the pre-calving or post-calving periods.The
projected levels of mining in the Dunkle Mine area would not be of
sufficient intensity to cause significant habitat loss or other disturbance
83
(USDI 1984).If the Dunkle Mine area is exchanged for other lands,
miners have consented to annually limit use during the calving period
until the first of July.
Conclusion:Caribou do not appear to have been affected by controlled
traffic levels but are adversely affected by irregular traffic related
activities.Habitat loss along the road corridor would be negligible,but
the extent of the habitat loss in Kantishna could affect caribou numbers.
Addition of the wolf townships would measurably benefit the Denali
caribou herd.
Bears .Tracy (1977)reported that grizzly bears are more sought for
viewing and photographing than other species.Therefore,they are more
often subject to disturbance when close to the road.Singer and Beattie
(1984)reported that grizzlies were observed,on the average,closer to
the road in 1983 than in 1973 and that they exhibited the greatest flight
distances after removing vehicle restrictions.Less avoidance response
would occur following implementation of an extended bus system.
According to Singer and Beattie grizzly sightings declined 32 percent
during the reported period of study.In addition they observed that
grizzlies were more cautious when screened by vegetation.It can be
expected that observations would continue to decline with a 45 percent
increase in traffic levels.
Sable Pass is an area heavily used by grizzly bears and subsequently is a
prime viewing area.When grizzlies are in the area,passengers are not
allowed to leave the shuttle buses,and hikers and people using private
vehicles are directed to stay on the road.
The number of incidents involving humans and bears increased from three
to five times in the period 1972-1980 in the front country where the
campgrounds are located.Between 1978 and 1981 there were up to 40
incidents annually of humans being approached by bears showing curiosity
or lack of fear.At the Igloo Canyon,Sanctuary,and Teklanika
campgrounds.There were five such incidents in 1983 and eight in 1984.
Campground expansion would be expected to increase these levels.Most
of the habitat loss associated with visitor development would occur
immediately adjacent to the road corridor,an area not heavily used by
grizzlies.Therefore,the loss would not significantly affect grizzly
populations.
Continued levels of poaching and more than 2,000 acres of habitat loss
could reduce numbers and influence activity patterns of bear in the
Kantishna Hills.It is expected that bears would continue to be attracted
occasionally to garbage generated by mining operations and that some of
these animals would be destroyed by miners (Valkenburg 1976).
Conclusion:Human/bear interactions appear to be growing and occur
commonly in campground areas.Increased numbers of campers would
aggravate the problem.A continued increase in traffic levels would
result in more avoidance of the park road corridor.Destruction of
habitat and loss through poaching would continue to moderately reduce
bear populations in the Kantishna Hills area.
84
Sheep .Singer and Beattie (1984)reported that sheep observations did
not decline from 1973 to 1983.The sheep also showed evidence of
habituation to vehicles.Migrating sheep were rarely observed,indicating
that they were more sensitive during road crossings.
The segment of the road corridor between Igloo Mountain and Sable
Mountain is crossed by great numbers of sheep in early spring.In late
May and early June herds with lambs cross the road.Also,the segment
between the Sanctuary and Teklanika rivers and the Hogan Creek area
are crossed by sheep moving south in early June and back north in
September and October.Vehicle and passenger restrictions apply to
these areas as previously described for other sensitive species.In
addition,road repair and maintenance activities are restricted from these
areas during these same periods.
The 70 acres of habitat loss associated with visitor facility development
would not affect important sheep habitat.
Mining activities in the Kantishna Hills or Dunkle Mine area occurs for the
most part in good sheep habitat.Poaching and subsistence hunting could
affect sheep populations if the number taken became excessive.
Conclusion:Sheep would not be significantly affected by regulated
traffic levels or habitat loss along the road corridor.Sheep would be
moderately affected by poaching and subsistence hunting in the Kantishna
Hills area.
Wolves .Wolves are seldom seen from the road corridor,and avoidance
behavior or habituation is unknown.Wolf population levels depend on
prey populations and therefore are indirectly affected by changes in the
number and distribution of prey.
The addition of the 63,000 acres associated with the wolf townships would
provide an added degree of protection to the Savage River wolf pack.
Continued poaching and legal subsistence trapping could reduce levels of
wolves in the Kantishna Hills area.
Conclusion:Wolves would not be significantly affected by activities along
the northern road corridor.Some measure of protection would be
afforded to the Savage River wolf pack by inclusion of the wolf
townships.
Impacts on Vegetation
Vegetation would be affected by the development of new facilities in the
north road corridor and by mineral development activity in the Kantishna
Hills and Dunkle Mine areas.The 86.6-mile-long park road corridor
spans three of the park's major vegetation associations:bottomland
spruce-poplar forest (21%of the corridor),moist tundra (48%),and alpine
tundra (31%).The forest vegetation along the easternmost 10 miles of the
road corridor and along the floodplains and river terraces that intersect
the road is dominated by white spruce,often in association with quaking
85
aspen.Balsam poplar is sometimes found on gravelly riverbottom sites.
Moist tundra is interspersed with the spruce-hardwood forest east of the
Teklanika River,and it becomes predominant west of the river.This
association is dominated by dwarf birch,willow,and low ericaceous
shrubs.Sedge tussocks are common in the wetter areas.Alpine tundra
is found at higher elevations (generally 2,500 to 5,000 feet),most notably
between Polychrome and Thorofare passes.Bedrock is usually close to
the surface or exposed.Vegetation is sparse and rarely grows taller
than a few inches.It consists of low shrubs and low mat plants,
including avens,in combination with mosses,grasses,sedges,
wildflowers,and lichens.Common shrubs include willow,dwarf birch,
and bearberry.The principal vegetation type in the Kantishna Hills is
moist tundra.No federally listed threatened or endangered plant species
are known to inhabit the area.Two candidate species inhabit dry
ridgelines at high elevations (see appendix J).
About 45 acres of upland spruce-hardwood forest vegetation would be
selectively cleared for construction of new facilities in the park
headquarters,hotel/depot,and Riley Creek areas.In this zone white
spruce dominates and is found in association with quaking aspen.
Predominant understory in the area includes alder,willow,and highbush
cranberry.Placement of the interpretive center adjacent to the entrance
road would disturb a 6.0-acre area of white spruce and quaking aspen
within this zone.A rich humus layer at this location supports diverse
mosses,lichens,and some ferns.New facilities would be designed to
minimize disturbance of this layer.Formal paths would be defined to
discourage random trampling of the vegetation.
Road rehabilitation,campground expansion,and construction of waysides
and other proposed facilities would disturb approximately 25 acres of
moist tundra.Taller willows would be removed from drainage areas
during the rehabilitation of the park road,and sparse willow growth
would be removed during scrape gravel-borrow operations at Stony
Creek,Igloo Creek,and other areas.A large new disturbance in this
vegetation type would occur at Teklanika,where the addition of up to 45
campsites would require the selective clearing of 2.5 acres.A caretaker
cabin at Teklanika and overnight housing for shuttle drivers at Toklat
could disturb an additional 1.5 acres of this vegetation type.
Approximately 21 acres of varying vegetation types would be restored to
natural conditions as a result of improved design,removed facilities,or
revegetation work.
About 2,250 acres of mixed vegetation types would be affected within the
Kantishna Hills area.The majority of placer mining disturbance would
probably occur within 580 acres of bottomland spruce-poplar forest and
about 1,610 acres of moist tundra.These vegetation types
characteristically grow in or adjacent to the floodplains and stream
channels that are the prime placer mining sites.Placer mining in the
Dunkle Mine area would disturb about 20 acres of floodplain forest,less
than 1 percent of the available habitat in that study area.
Conclusion:Approximately 60 acres of vegetation,predominantly
spruce-hardwood forest,would be selectively cleared for facility
86
construction in the park road corridor.About 2,250 acres of mostly
moist tundra vegetation,1.2 percent of the Kantishna Hills study area,
would be disturbed in the Kantishna Hills,and about 20 acres would be
disturbed in the Dunkle Mine area as placer mining continued.Impacts
on vegetation would be significant within the Kantishna Hills area.
The patchy distribution of mineral development sites,coupled with the
patchy distribution of the vegetation types,would result in no significant
loss of any vegetation type except perhaps the riparian bottomland forest,
approximately 11 percent of which would be destroyed.
Impacts on Fish
Fish would be affected by changes in water quality and streamflow caused
by road maintenance and bridge repair/replacement in the park road
corridor and by placer mining in the Kantishna Hills and Dunkle Mine
areas.In the road corridor the arctic grayling is commonly found east of
Wonder Lake along select tributaries containing relatively small amounts of
glacial silt.
In the Kantishna Hills area approximately 360 miles of clearwater streams
provide rearing,feeding,spawning,and overwintering habitat for arctic
grayling,chinook salmon,coho salmon,and chum salmon.Approximately
20 miles of streams have been extensively disturbed by mining.An
additional 28 miles could be affected if all existing claims were operated.
Undisturbed streams or stream reaches containing productive fish habitat
include Moose Creek,North Fork of Moose Creek,Jumbo Creek (outside
the study area),Eldorado Creek,Rock Creek,and the unmined reaches
of Glacier and Caribou creeks.Known chinook and chum salmon spawning
areas exist in sections of the Bearpaw River,Moose Creek,Glacier
Creek,and Caribou Creek.In the Dunkle Mine area productive fish
habitat is provided by Colorado Creek.
Placer mining claims in the Moose,Glacier,Caribou,and Eldorado creek
drainages would subject fish habitat to extensive physical disturbance.
Streambeds overlain by mining claims would be altered by the removal of
riparian vegetation,construction of access roads,use of heavy mining
equipment in the streambeds,channelization and relocation of streambeds,
excavation and processing of stream gravels,and construction of
wastewater treatment facilities for mine effluent.Specific impacts would
include destruction of habitat for fish spawning,rearing,and feeding;
loss of stream sinuosity;impediments to the natural migrations of fish;
reduced levels of primary production by algae and macrophytes,the basis
of the food chain in stream ecosystems;loss of available instream cover
for fishes (pools,boulders,cut banks);and elevated heavy metal
concentrations.
Mining operations on Moose Creek and lower Eldorado Creek could impede
or stress natural fish migrations into Jumbo,upper Eldorado,and North
Fork of Moose creeks.As a result,some of the most productive
spawning,rearing,and feeding habitat could be altered.This would
constitute 8 percent of the total fish habitat in the Kantishna Hills study
area.High turbidity levels and sediment would be major concerns
87
because the mining season coincides with periods of peak biological
productivity and peak salmon spawning.In the long term,water quality
factors would limit the natural reproduction,growth,and survival of
salmon in these streams,which are possibly the most important salmon
spawning streams within Denali National Park and Preserve.
Placer mining in the Dunkle Mine area would subject fish habitat in the
lower 2 miles of Colorado Creek to only a minor degree of alteration from
sedimentation,turbidity,increased heavy metal levels,and physical
manipulation of stream channels.
Conclusion:Visitor facility development and road repair and maintenance
would have minor if any impacts on fish populations adjacent to the road
corridor.Impacts on arctic grayling as a result of repair and/or
replacement of bridges would be temporary and minor.About 15 percent
of the 360 miles of Clearwater streams in the Kantishna Hills area would
be adversely affected by mining operations.This would represent a
significant impact on the park's fisheries.
Impacts on Water Quality
Water quality would potentially be affected by vehicle travel and road
work in the park road corridor and by mineral development in the
Kantishna Hills and Dunkle Mine areas.
Vehicles traveling on the park road would continue to introduce minor
levels of pollutants,including immeasurable amounts of particulates and
hydrocarbons,which would eventually reach roadside streamcourses.A
45 percent increase in traffic volume would increase these pollutants,but
not to any measurable extent.
Gravel to resurface the park road would be obtained from scrap and berm
sources in inactive floodplains.Gravel removal operations in the inactive
floodplain sites would be located and designed to minimize the potentials
for temporary sedimentation and stream turbidity and long-term ero^-ah.
A maximum of 10 acres would be affected along the park road corridpr
No adverse impacts would be expected to result from domestic water
consumption or sewage disposal in the road corridor.Potable water would
continue to be derived primarily from wells.No measurable impact on (^
groundwater has been observed,and none would be expected.A
Recent measurements indicate that inadequate treatment of mine effluent is
causing excess levels of suspended solids,heavy metals,and turbidity in
normally clear streams in the Kantishna Hills.Continued seasonal mining
in the area would affect about 164 miles of streams in the Kantishna Hills.
Impacts on water quality in the Dunkle Mine area would remain minor
because of the relatively small amount of mining activity in that area.
Conclusions:Water quality would not be measurably affected by visitor
use or facility development.Placer mining in the Kantishna Hills area
would have an adverse effect on the area's water quality,principally by
adding suspended solids,heavy metals,and turbidity.
88
Impacts on Air Quality
Although no comprehensive air quality monitoring program is in effect,a
modest monitoring program indicates that the air quality within the park
is generally excellent.Air samples taken along the road during the
summer of 1977 showed very low levels of sulfur dioxide and carbon
monoxide,which were below the detection limits of most instrumentation.
Vehicle emissions and the dust produced by vehicles are the primary
sources of air pollutants along the north-side road corridor.These
sources are relatively insignificant,localized,and temporary;however,
they have been increasing at a significant rate.Singer and Beattie (NPS
1984)calculated that vehicles pass any given spot on the north-side road
once every 9 minutes.This is up from once every 14 minutes in 1972
(Tracy and Dean 1977).
Increasing traffic by 45 percent would increase the relatively low levels of
pollution.A dust palliative might be useful in suppressing dust along
the road on the drier summer days,but the potential for adverse
environmental impacts would first have to be evaluated.Calcium chloride,
slow-cure and emulsified oils,and water all appear to have the potential
for unacceptable impacts on streamwater quality and vegetation.
Forest fires (mostly of natural origin)occasionally cast a pall of smoke
over much of the park for days at a time.This source of air pollution is
intermittent,but it is temporarily more disruptive to the viewing
experience than the presence of airborne dust.The National Park
Service fire management plan to allow most natural fires to fulfill their
ecological role in vegetative succession could affect Denali's class I air
quality if a fire of sufficient magnitude occurred.It is expected that
fires of a magnitude to affect class I air quality could occur,but the
possibility is considered remote.The impact on air quality would be
short-term,probably lasting no longer than one week.
Conclusion:Impacts on air quality would be insignificant and would
result primarily from vehicle emissions and dust.These impacts would be
localized and temporary.The potential for a class I air quality violation
from natural fires appears remote,and any impacts would be minor.
Impacts on Archeological and Historic Resources
Construction of additional campsites and comfort stations at the Teklanika
campground would not directly affect the Teklanika archeological district,
listed on the National Register of Historic Places.The proposed
developments would be outside the district boundary.All construction
work would be preceded by a thorough archeological investigation of areas
where construction activities would take place.Expansion of the
Teklanika campground could result in increased visitation to the
archeological sites and lead to indirect and secondary impacts,such as
site trampling/erosion and unauthorized collecting or digging.No
problems have been discovered as yet,but informal trails pass through
the two key sites within the district.These paths have existed for many
years but,in the opinion of the NPS Alaska regional archeologist,they
have not contributed to significant resource problems.
89
Prehistoric sites located within a mile of the Denali road corridor would
not be directly affected as a result of proposals discussed in this plan.
These sites would continue to be evaluated and managed according to
existing NPS policy,guidelines,and procedures,and by federal law,
regulation,and policy.No other known sites would be affected by
activities related to visitor use and development.
Twenty-eight structures (mostly along the road corridor)are on the List
of Classified Structures for Denali National Park and Preserve,and
further evaluation would determine which,if any,should be placed on the
National Register.Actions proposed in the plan would affect at least two
of the structures on the list--the Wonder Lake ranger station and the
Pearson cabin (or Toklat patrol cabin)near the Toklat road camp.The
Wonder Lake ranger station was evaluated in September 1981,and it was
determined that the structure was not eligible for nomination to the
National Register.Data obtained in 1981 are being analyzed to determine
if structural sags and foundation problems can be corrected economically
and without significantly altering the historic integrity of the resource.
Under this alternative,the structure would be preserved if feasible.
However,if restoration costs were prohibitive or if the building could not
be restored to provide adequate service,it would be replaced.
Construction of new seasonal residences at the Toklat road camp would
probably eliminate the need to use the Pearson cabin as a residence.The
structure would be evaluated for its eligibility for inclusion on the
National Register and would be preserved for its interpretive potential.
Several classified structures in the headquarters area would be considered
for renovation,adaptive use,or possible relocation.Specific proposals
for these structures would be developed during the comprehensive design
phase,in consultation with appropriate NPS cultural resource specialists.
Significant adverse effects would not be anticipated.
Of the three known archeological sites in the Kantishna Hills area,two
would be threatened by placer mining:the site on Rainy Creek and the
site on Willow Creek.The loss of either site would be significant.
Placer mining on Spruce Creek could affect the Spruce Creek cabin ruins.
Additional historic sites that would potentially be threatened include the
Caribou Creek cabin and wagon complex,the cabin ruin near the airstrip,
the Glacier Creek dragline operation.Glacier City,and the Red Top (or
Banjo)mill complex.No known archeological or historic sites would be
threatened in the Dunkle Mine area.Mitigating measures could include
surface collection followed by testing and possible complete excavation
depending on the significance of each individual site.
Conclusion:Archeological and historical resources would be threatened in
the vicinity of Teklanika and at numerous sites in the the Kantishna Hills
area.
Impacts on Subsistence Use
Visitor use and development in the road corridor would have no impact on
subsistence use because subsistence activities are not permitted in that
90
part of the park (inside the original park boundary).Some potential for
adverse impacts on subsistence use would result from mineral
development,since that activity occurs in the new park additions where
subsistence is an allowable traditional use.
Nine residents are currently eligible to engage in subsistence harvests
within the Kantishna Hills.Six to eight moose and caribou are hunted by
subsistence hunters each year in the study area.Residents of Kantishna
and lands along the George Parks Highway also trap a variety of
furbearers in the study area,including marten,lynx,wolf,wolverine,
and fox;the numbers of animals trapped fluctuate annually.
Mining operations continued at existing levels would result in minor
reductions in the wildlife populations on which subsistence users depend.
Moose populations would be reduced more than caribou populations
because placer mining would damage the riparian habitat most important to
moose.Furbearer populations would also be slightly reduced,particularly
the populations of species dependent on riparian habitat,such as marten
and fox.Placer mining would be conducted in areas of currently
undisturbed riparian habitat on Glacier,Caribou,and Moose creeks and
some of their tributaries.Construction of new mining trails would
improve access for subsistence hunters within the Kantishna Hills,
therefore aiding in subsistence harvests.
Conclusion:Implementing this alternative would cause minor reductions in
wildlife populations used by qualified subsistence users,resulting in
reduced subsistence harvests.New mining trail construction could
improve access for subsistence hunters.A subsistence use evaluation
(810 compliance)has been accomplished in conjunction with this project
and is included in appendix F.
Impacts on Park Visitors and Regional Tourism
Levels of use at Denali National Park have been increasing dramatically
since the opening of the George Parks Highway in 1972,and they would
be expected to continue to do so.Visitation levels in 1971 were about
44,000,in 1972 about 88,000,in 1981 about 256,500,and in 1984 about
394,000.Demand would be expected to increase to 644,000 visits per
year by 1994.
Under this alternative,the majority of visitors would remain confined to
the park road corridor,where their experience would be principally
related to viewing wildlife and Mount McKinley.Implementation of the
1983 Development Concept Plan would promote modest improvements in the
visitor experience.Opportunities for camping along the north park road
would be increased by the addition of approximately 95-145 new campsites
within the existing campgrounds.More sources of information would be
available to visitors through personal contact and publications.Shuttle
system improvements and construction of better waysides would increase
visitors'options for park activities.Short loop trails at points of
interest would provide additional opportunities to hike within the park.
The long-term expansion planned for the Eielson Visitor Center would
improve the visitors'experiences at this dramatic viewpoint.
91
2,692 2,993 2,904 2,805
908 984 1,285 1,203
3,773 5,852 6,214 6,245
2,155 1,443 1,858 1,702
As stated above,a significant part of the Denali experience would
continue to be related to scenic and wildlife viewing.However,wildlife
appear to be adversely affected by the vehicles used by visitors to reach
prime wildlife viewing areas.To reduce the impacts of vehicles,the
National Park Service has limited shuttle bus use along the road since
1981 (see table 4).As a result of ongoing efforts,during the period
1981-1983,when total park visits increased by 36 percent,vehicle use
increased by only 29 percent,and in 1984 vehicle use declined.
Table 4:Numbers and Kinds of Vehicles Using the
North Park Road Corridor,1981-1984
_1981 1982 1983 1984
Shuttle buses
Tour buses
Private vehicles
NPS/special permit
Total 9,528 11,272 12,261 11,955
The largest increases in vehicle numbers between 1981 and 1983 were
attributable to a 42 percent increase in tour buses and a 65 percent
increase in private vehicles destined to campgrounds beyond Savage
River.NPS vehicles and special permits decreased by 14 percent over
this same period.
Allowing vehicle traffic to increase further would result in reduced
opportunities for viewing wildlife,notably grizzly bear and moose.
Sightings of these species decreased 32 and 72 percent,respectively,
during a recent 10-year period when vehicle traffic increased by 50
percent.If traffic increased an additional 45 percent over the next 10
years,sightings could be expected to continue to decrease,and if they
continued to decrease proportionally,it would no longer be possible to
view moose along the road corridor.
Continued mining at existing levels in the Kantishna Hills area would
reduce opportunities for viewing moose in that part of the park,also.
Mining would also have an adverse effect on sportfishing in the Kantishna
Hills as a result of adverse effects on fish habitat (see "Impacts on
Fish").Approximately 1,600-1,700 recreationists visited the Kantishna
Hills study area in the summer of 1983.About 1,100 people visited for
part of a day,and the remainder stayed for longer periods.Recreational
use of the Kantishna Hills is increasing yearly,with most recreation
occurring near Kantishna.
In the short run Denali would remain a primary attraction for Alaska
tourism.However,if increasing numbers of visitors were someday denied
access to the park complex because of limited facilities,Denali's role as a
stimulus to tourism could decline in the future.Those sectors of the
local and regional economies dependent upon visitors to the park's north
side would continue to enjoy the revenues generated by this use;
92
however,new economic opportunities might be limited by this alternative.
Only modest employment and income would be generated through
expenditures by the federal government.However,private enterprise
might respond to increasing demands and expand facilities along the
George Parks Highway and on private inholdings within Kantishna.
Conclusion:There would be minor improvements in the visitor experience
associated with improvement of facilities;however,implementation of this
alternative would not change the pattern of recreational use in Denali to
any significant degree.So long as visitor use and development was
confined to the park road corridor,visitor demand could not be met
without a reduction in wildlife viewing opportunities.Private enterprise
would be stimulated by increasing visitor demand to provide additional
accommodations and other commercial services on private lands.
Continuation of the existing levels of mining activities in the Kantishna
Hills area would result in fewer opportunities for sportfishing,wildlife
observation,and recreation in that portion of the park.Opportunities
for observing active mining operations would be continued.
Impacts on Scenic Quality
Additional placer mining on valid claims in undeveloped areas of the
Kantishna Hills would alter the natural landscape through the stripping of
vegetation and soil,stockpiling of gravels and overburden,introduction
of heavy mining equipment and structures,siltation of otherwise
clear-flowing streams,and construction of new mining trails within placer
claim boundaries.Additional ground disturbance would occur on 2,250
acres of land that is typical of the hilly areas of interior Alaska.Mining
activities have previously disturbed natural scenic qualities in the
southern and western portions of the area.New roads and stream
siltation would extend beyond the mining claims and would degrade scenic
qualities in the area for as long as 100 years following the conclusion of
placer mining.These effects would not be visible from Wonder Lake or
any other major visitor use area.
Placer mining in the Dunkle Mine area would cause stream modifications
and the stockpiling of gravels.The ordinarily clear-flowing waters of the
creek would be temporarily clouded by mining-induced sediments.
Temporary structures for residences and equipment storage would be
located along the lower portion of the creek.This mining activity would
occur in the steep-sided Colorado Creek drainage and not be visible from
other locations within the area.
Conclusion:Impacts of placer mining would increase,but they would not
be visible to most park visitors.
Impacts on Wilderness Values
Current wilderness boundaries exclude a 300-foot-wide corridor that
extends for 150 feet on either side of the park road.All existing and
proposed visitor development lies within this corridor.No direct impacts
93
on wilderness values would be anticipated.However,backcountry users
would be abruptly aware of the "lack of wilderness"associated with the
corridor on their return from the backcountry.
In the Kantishna Hills area approximately 70 percent of the study area is
currently suitable for designation as wilderness,as provided for in the
Wilderness Act of 1964.These lands offer opportunities for solitude and
recreation in undisturbed environments.Because private lands are not
eligible for designation,the 680 acres of patented mining claims in the
study area are not eligible for designation.Some federal lands in the
study area are unsuitable for wilderness designation because of the
presence of unpatented mining claims,permanent roads,structures,and
other man-made effects.Some areas beyond claims and roads are also
unsuitable for wilderness designation because of the visual intrusions and
noise of mining activities and traffic.
Placer mining at existing levels would result in the development of mining
trails in the study area and disturbance of about 2,250 additional acres.
Existing levels of lode mining would result in negligible disturbance.
Disturbances resulting from placer and lode mining would occur within the
areas already unsuitable for wilderness designation.
Nearly all of the Dunkle Mine study area is in a natural,undisturbed
condition at the present time.The entire study area is in federal
ownership,although there are unpatented mining claims within the study
area.Lands in the southwestern portion of the study area,along a
mining access road,and lands encumbered by unpatented mining claims
are not suitable for designation as wilderness.Approximately 85 percent
of the study area is currently suitable for wilderness designation and
offers opportunities for solitude and recreation in an undisturbed
environment.Approximately 9 acres would be disturbed by placer gold
mining.With the commencement of placer mining on lower Colorado
Creek,this portion of the study area would remain unsuitable for
wilderness designation.It is assumed that the unpatented lode claims
would be determined to be invalid and that these claims would be voided.
The lands occupied by these claims would subsequently become suitable
for wilderness designation.
Conclusion:No significant impacts on wilderness values would result from
visitor use and development activities along the Denali road corridor or
from mining activities in the Kantishna Hills and Dunkle Mine areas.
Lands affected by mining activities are unsuitable for wilderness
designation because they are not in full federal ownership.Approximately
70 percent of the Kantishna Hills area and 85 percent of the Dunkle Mine
area would remain suitable for wilderness designation.
Impacts on Local Economy and Employment
Present NPS employees account for 28 permanent (year-round)and 117
seasonal positions.The concessioner employs 5 permanent and 235
seasonal employees.
94
Businesses outside the park boundary near the Riley Creek complex
basically consist of lodging,campgrounds,rafting,guides,trail rides,
restaurants,and related support services.Such businesses could be
expected to increase as part of the general growth pattern of the area.
Existing levels of mining activity in the Kantishna Hills study area would
allow for the continued seasonal employment in the Kantishna area of
100-120 people engaged in placer mining operations,5-17 people in small
lode mining operations,and approximately 15 people in the operation of
lodges and food services.Additional employment would be generated by
mining outside the Kantishna area in transportation services,retail sales,
manufacturing,mineral processing,and government.
Conclusion:Demand for visitor services would be expected to increase
over the next 10 years.This would result in continued employment
opportunities with the concessioner and outside of the park in the local
economy.
ALTERNATIVE B:DEVELOP A VISITOR SERVICE AND ACTIVITY
CENTER ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND REDUCE VEHICLE USE AND
CAMPING ALONG THE NORTH ROAD
Introduction
This section describes the impacts of alternative B that would differ from
the impacts of alternative A.The impacts of resource management
actions,mineral development in the Kantishna Hills and Dunkle Mine
areas,and acquisition of the wolf townships would be identical to the
impacts described for alternative A,and they are not repeated in this
section.The impacts described in this section would result from
decreases in camping and vehicle use on the north side of Denali and
from new development and use on the south side.
The visitor use and facilities proposed for the south side of Denali would
primarily occur on state lands (see the south-side proposals for visitor
use in the "General Management Plan").The activities that would occur
within Denali National Park over the life of this plan would be
overflights,fixed-wing aircraft or helicopter landings at designated sites,
overnight stays in mountain huts,backcountry hiking,and cross-country
skiing,dogsledding,and snowmobiling during the winter.Related
development would include up to four mountain huts similar to the Sheldon
hut adjacent to the Ruth Amphitheater.This facility offers overnight
sleeping accommodations and pit toilets;no food service is available.All
construction materials were flown in.Proposed mountain huts in the
future might accommodate up to 20 persons.The locations have not been
determined,but they might include the vicinities of the drainages of Slide
and Alder creeks.The maximum disturbed areas related to mountain huts
would be about \acre apiece,or 2 acres total.Designated trails might
also be developed in the national park.The alignments would depend
upon visitor use patterns and whether or not resource degradation was
occurring at various locations.Visitor access would be principally by
fixed-wing aircraft and possibly by helicopter.Overflights occur now at
an estimated rate of five or fewer a day.Air traffic access routes would
95
be designated.At peak use periods the number of overflights might
increase to 10 or 15 per day.
Impacts on Moose^Caribou^Bear,Pall Sheep,and Wolf
As described for alternative A,moose and bear appear to be the wildlife
species most affected by traffic levels along the north road corridor;
these species have generally avoided vehicles and visitors,although some
individuals have become habituated.Under this alternative,vehicle
traffic would initially be held to plus or minus 15 percent of the 1984
levels to help to avoid further increases in avoidance behavior by
wildlife.The eventual elimination of vehicle camping between Savage
River and Wonder Lake would reduce total vehicle traffic by about 23
percent.Allowable increases in shuttle bus service would reduce this
advantage to about 17 percent at the end of 10 years.An overall 17
percent reduction in road traffic might result in a measurable increase in
observations of moose and bear in the corridor.Extending the shuttle
bus season would have additional beneficial effects by further decreasing
avoidance behavior by wildlife.Singer and Beattie (NPS 1984)noted a
disproportionate increase in wildlife's avoidance of the road corridor when
vehicle restrictions were eliminated after the summer season.In recent
years the number of private vehicles using the road following the
relaxation of vehicle restrictions has averaged 530 vehicles per season;
however in 1984 there were 1,100 vehicles on the road over the Labor
Day weekend alone.Passengers leaving vehicles contributed significantly
to adverse wildlife reactions.Extending the shuttle bus season would
eliminate these activities and result in less disturbance to wildlife.
Elimination of camping facilities at Sanctuary,Teklanika,and Igloo would
result in approximately 46 acres of wildlife habitat eventually returning to
natural conditions.Recovered habitat would predominantly be within the
moist tundra vegetation type.
Fewer concentrations of moose,caribou,sheep,bear,or wolf occur on
the south side of the national park,primarily because of the rugged
topography of the area.Most new development on the south side of the
national park would occur at high-elevation sites that do not provide
suitable habitat for large mammals.Backcountry users,who would be
expected to number fewer than 200 per day,would be spread out over an
area greater than 400 square miles,so their effect would be expected to
be minor.Fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters would continue to land on
glaciers and other designated sites.Glacier landings would generally
remain confined to areas above the ice fall zones.Impacts on wildlife
would be expected to be minimal.
Overall impacts on specific species are summarized below:
Moose :An overall 17 percent reduction in vehicle traffic on the
north road corridor would decrease avoidance behavior and might
result in an increase in the number of moose visible from the road.
Removal of the campgrounds and other development would result in
the restoration of 46 acres of habitat on the north side of Denali.
Moose concentrations in the vicinity of the proposed south-side
96
development occur outside the park.For example,relatively large
numbers of moose are found in the Tokositna and Chulitna river
drainages.The principal impact on moose populations would be
related to infrequent encounters with backcountry users and
disturbance associated with overflights.Neither impact would be
expected to significantly affect moose populations.
Caribou :The reduction in traffic on the north park road would
decrease impacts on caribou behavior.The removal of the three
campgrounds and restoration of 46 acres of vegetation would make
more habitat available to caribou.Road construction would result in
removal of vegetation and visual barriers that normally inhibit
caribou in crossing roadways.Road construction and facility
development along the park road would result in short-term impacts
such as avoiding the area due to equipment noise.Road
construction would be scheduled to avoid operation between May and
early June,when wildlife travel through the area in large numbers.
Inclusion of the wolf townships would protect winter range of the
Denali caribou herd from incompatible development and eliminate
sport hunting.
Caribou do not occur on the south side of Denali in any significant
numbers.A small population uses an area approximately 3 to 5 miles
east of Curry Ridge on state park lands,where it would not be
affected by development or use of the proposed visitor facilities.
Bears :Impacts under alternative B would differ from those
described for alternative A in two respects.First,elimination of
three campgrounds along the north park road would reduce the
likelihood of human/bear interaction,artificial food sources,and
potential reduction of bears,resulting in better bear management.
Bear/human interactions at the campgrounds proposed for removal
amounted to 5 incidents in 1983 and 8 incidents in 1984.Second,a
net restoration of 46 acres on the north side would provide more
natural habitat along the road corridor.
On the south side,relatively little bear habitat occurs within park
boundaries near the Ruth Glacier.Both black bear and brown bear
habitat are found on state park lands.Approximately 25 acres
would be utilized for access and development,which is insignificant
compared to the total available.Frequent bear encounters have
occurred in state park campgrounds,and future design efforts will
mitigate this potential problem by actions such as using bearproof
garbage containers and not locating facilities in areas of high bear
concentrations.
Sheep :Impacts would be minor.Sheep do not appear to be
significantly affected by existing levels of traffic on the north park
road,and the proposed reduction in traffic levels would not be
expected to affect sheep populations or behavior.Sheep are not
found on the south side of Denali,so no impacts would result from
south-side developments.
97
Wolves :No known wolf packs exist within the southern park
boundaries.However,it is likely that some pack territory overlaps
some areas of proposed visitor use.Development on state park
lands would not be expected to directly influence wolf populations in
the area.Additional impacts on wolf populations would be identical
to alternative A.
Swans :Trumpeter swans frequent floodplain meadows and small
ponds on state park lands on the south side of Denali.The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service has a proposal for a trumpeter swan
reserve for this area (see Regional Influences map).The proposed
south-side development i'"over 20 miles away,and there would be no
impact from backcountry use in the national park.
Conclusion:Impacts on wildlife along the north road corridor would be
expected to decrease as a result of a 17 percent reduction in traffic and
the restoration of 46 acres of wildlife habitat.Wildlife populations on the
south side of Denali National Park would not be expected to be
significantly affected.
Impacts on Vegetation
On the north side of the park,the reconstruction of the hotel would
affect 21 acres of the previously impacted hotel area,and construction of
a visitor center would result in disturbance of 24 acres of land.In all,
new construction would disturb 35 fewer acres than would be affected
under alternative A,the difference resulting from no new campsites.
Removal of some facilities would allow restoration of natural conditions on
about 46 acres.This would be 25 acres more than would be restored
under alternative A,the difference resulting from the removal of
campgrounds at Teklanika,Igloo,and Sanctuary.
On the south side of Denali,most disturbance of vegetation would occur
on state park land.Construction of an access road to the proposed
visitor service and activity center would affect approximately 9 to 11
acres of vegetation and soils.The affected vegetation would include
spruce-hardwood forest below 2,000 feet and tundra/upland thicket above
that elevation.
The construction and use of an activity and service center,with access,
parking,camping,lodging,interpretive,and administrative facilities,
would severely disturb moist tundra and upland thickets on Curry Ridge,
at about the 2,500-foot elevation.Although accurate figures are difficult
to project at this early stage in the planning,experience with visitor
complexes in other park areas with a comparable range of visitor services
suggests that the south-side activity center might affect as much as 20
acres of land on Curry Ridge.
The development on Curry Ridge could be supplemented by additional
facilities (campgrounds,hiking trails,interpretive pulloffs)along the
George Parks Highway.Impacts along the highway would be less severe
because the highway corridor passes through the more resilient
spruce-hardwood vegetation type that has already been disturbed by road
construction
.
98
Development of four mountain huts inside the national park wou!d not
impact an area greater than 2 acres (0.5 acre each).Specific sites have
not been proposed,but the huts would probably be located in areas
affording the best views,which are principally the high-elevation rock
fields and tundra.
Probable sites for fixed-wing and helicopter landings would include smooth
glaciated areas,such as occur above the ice fall on Ruth Glacier,and
nonvegetated gravel bars.
Trail development in the southern part of the park would affect about 3
acres of mixed vegetation types.Trail locations have not been proposed
but are currently being studied.The overall effect would not be
expected to be any greater than that which would occur with normal
backcountry use.
No threatened or endangered plant species are known to occur within the
southern end of the park (see appendix J).Therefore,no impact would
be anticipated.Areas proposed for trail or other development would be
evaluated for the presence of previously unknown threatened or
endangered species,and if discovered,plans would be changed to avoid
these sensitive areas.
Conclusion:Approximately 24 acres of mixed vegetation types would be
disturbed along the north road corridor,and 46 acres would be restored,
for a net gain of 22 acres allowed to return to natural conditions.The
primary impact on the south side of Denali would occur within Denali
State Park,where an estimated 30 acres would be disturbed by
construction of the visitor center and access.Facility development within
Denali National Park would not affect more than 2 acres for huts plus an
additional 3 acres for trail development.
Impacts on Water Quality
Overall impacts on water quality along the north-side road corridor are
currently negligible,and they would be reduced by a 17 percent decrease
in vehicle trips over the life of the plan.
Purchase of surface rights in the Kantishna Hills and Dunkle Mine areas
would have no appreciable effect on water quality because placer mining
would continue.
Development of visitor facilities on the south side of Denali would occur
primarily on Curry Ridge,where the major drainages include the Susitna
River and Troublesome Creek.Road access to Curry Ridge directly off
the George Parks Highway would not affect either watercourse or the
Chulitna River on the other side of the highway.
Visitor facilities on the south side of Denali National Park would be
confined to trails and mountain huts.Foot trails would occasionally cross
streams and creeks or traverse floodplains,but the impact on water
quality would be insignificant.Mountain hut development would occur on
higher,well-drained sites affording scenic vistas,where it would not
99
affect water quality.Sites for pit toilets would be located in well-drained
areas.
Conclusion:No significant effects on water quality would be anticipated
as a result of the proposed south-side visitor use and development.
Impacts on Air Quality
Elimination of vehicle camping between Savage River and Wonder Lake
would initially reduce vehicle sources of emissions and road dust by about
23 percent.Subsequent incremental increases in shuttle bus service would
reduce this advantage to about 17 percent at the end of 10 years.
Air quality along the George Parks Highway in the vicinity of the
south-side development would decrease as a result of increased auto
emissions and fossil fuels burned for heating facilities.The level of
increase is difficult to estimate,but in terms of numbers of vehicles and
facilities it may be assumed to be equivalent to north-side levels.
Aircraft and helicopter flights into the south side of Denali National Park
would be a negligible source of exhaust emissions.
Conclusion:North-side road corridor emissions and road dust would be
expected to decrease by 17 percent because of an overall 17 percent
reduction in traffic.Overall,air quality impacts of the south-side
development would be assumed to be equivalent to north-side levels.
Pollution levels on both the north and south sides of the park would be
insignificant and would not exceed the limitations established for
designated class I areas.
Impacts on Archeological and Historic Resources
The removal of campgrounds between Savage River and Wonder Lake
might result in fewer human impacts on the cultural resources that are
adjacent to the existing campgrounds.No sites are known to exist within
the area proposed for development on Curry Ridge,and none are known
on the south side of Denali National Park.Therefore,no impacts on
archeological resources would be expected to result from the south-side
development proposal.Site-specific planning for Denali State Park and
the south side of Denali National Park would be accomplished in
conjunction with archeological surveys of the proposed development sites.
Should archeological evidence be discovered,appropriate mitigating
measures would be applied.
Conclusion:No known cultural resources would be affected by north-side
or south-side proposals.
Impacts on Subsistence Use
Subsistence use along the north-side road corridor is nonexistent and
would not change as a result of reducing the north-side developments.
100
There is no subsistence use in the vicinity of Denali State Park '^Curry
Ridge area).Subsistence use on the south side of Denali National Park
occurs primarily from Cantwell to the west fork of the Chulitna and
consists of hunting and trapping.These types and levels of use would
not be altered.
Conclusion:Subsistence use would not be affected.
Impacts on Park Visitors and Regional Tourism
The primary effect of eliminating camping between Savage River and
Wonder Lake would be to eliminate opportunities for camping at 62
drive-in and two group sites.These sites would not be removed until
replacement facilities were developed on the south side of Denali.
Nevertheless repeat visitors desiring to camp again at these same
campgrounds would be disappointed that they were closed.Even though
campgrounds would be removed,the numbers of visitors who would be
able to use the park to see wildlife would actually increase,since bus
service would be increased by 20 percent.The chances for visitors to
observe wildlife would increase as a result of an overall 17 percent
reduction in vehicle traffic and a decrease in the number of visitors who
could freely leave their vehicles,causing avoidance reactions by wildlife.
Implementation of a south-side service and activity center would have
major effects on the visitor experience,the patterns of use,and the
ability to accommodate visitors at Denali.Visitors preferring day
activities and programs near a major visitor complex or sightseeing
flights,skiing,river rafting,camping,or hiking would find greatly
expanded opportunities for these pursuits on the south side.Some
visitors would likely limit their stay at Denali to this area.Other visitors
seeking the experience of the vast open tundra and wildlife display on
the north side would continue to use the park road corridor.
A primary objective of developing the south side would be to add a new
dimension to the visitor experience in Denali.This would be accomplished
by focusing use upon the McKinley massif and the glaciers.In contrast
to the wildlife-viewing experience available on the north side,the south
side would offer a mountain experience so that visitors could gain a
greater appreciation of this component of the park.
It is anticipated that with an expanded visitor use season,300,000 to
400,000 visitors a year--as many as now visit the north side--might utilize
facilities on the south side of Denali.Although the major facilities at the
state park would attract and retain a large number of tour-related
visitors,it is expected that up to 200 visitors per day might enter Denali
National Park.These visitors would be spread out over an area in
excess of 400 square miles on the south side.
No adverse effect on climbing activities would be expected because most
of the activities are staged out of a base camp on the Kahiltna Glacier
and therefore would remain isolated from the increased visitor activity
centered on the Ruth Glacier.With increased access and accommodations
provided on the south side of the park,climbing areas such as the
Tokosha Mountains and Ruth Glacier would gain in popularity.
101
Backcountry users might be affected by overflights in fixed-wing aircraft
and helicopters.Backcountry users would be monitored periodically to
detect any significant degradation of their experience.Should a
significant decrease be observed,then overflights and landings would be
regulated.
Conclusion:Levels of use along the north-side of Denali would remain
about the same,although there would be some reduction in camping within
the park.Visitor use on the south side of Denali would be expected to
be as high as use on the north side.Overall,Denali's recreational
opportunities would be increased by south-side developments.
Impacts on Scenic Quality
Facility developments on Curry Ridge would disrupt the natural scene of
the ridge.The orientation of the facilities,and the visitors view,would
be towards Mount McKinley and the Alaska Range.
Conclusion:Facility development would have no impact on the scenic
quality of the park.It would enhance the visitor opportunity to view the
Alaska Range.
Impacts on Wilderness Values
The Ruth Glacier would not be suitable for wilderness designation because
of its intended use as the focus for visitor activities on the south side of
Denali National Park.
Deletion of campgrounds along the north road corridor would enhance the
values of the adjacent wilderness by returning approximately 49 acres to
natural conditions.
Impacts on Local Economy and Employment
The preferred alternative would enhance Denali's role as a major
attraction of Alaskan tourism.Th^local economy would continue to
benefit from the current level of visitor use on the north side.In
addition,new opportunities for economic benefit would be created by
attracting additional visitors to the south side and by extending the
season of use beyond the peak summer months.
Implementation of a south-side service and activity center would be
expected to benefit the local economy and perhaps the regional economy in
a variety of tangible ways.Employment opportunities and additional
income would be realized over the lifetime of the construction projects.
In the longer run employment and income would also be expanded by
opportunities to supply additional visitors with necessary services.It is
anticipated that many of the facilities and support services would be
provided by private enterprise.It is therefore expected that the
preferred alternative would create new opportunities for local
entrepreneurs.
102
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Physiography and Geology
The Denali area is dominated by Mount McKinley and an east-west
trending line of towering mountains known as the Alaska Range.The
Alaska Range forms the northernmost portion of the Pacific Mountain
System,and it is one of the great mountain uplifts in North America,
rising above 500-to 2,000-foot-elevation lowlands to the pinnacle of Mount
McKinley at 20,320 feet.
A series of two and sometimes three parallel rugged and glaciated
mountain ridges compose the Alaska Range.In the vicinity of Mount
McKinley,numerous peaks stand at elevations of 10,000 to 13,000 feet.
Mount Foraker,14^i miles southwest of McKinley,is the second highest
peak,attaining an altitude of 17,400 feet.Nearby Mount Hunter,third
highest,is 14,573 feet.The range is perpetually snowclad above
approximately 7,000 feet on the north and 6,000 feet on the south.
Glaciers are numerous and tend to be larger and longer on the south side
of the range than on the north.The larger glaciers range between 35
and 45 miles in length.These include the Kahiltna (the largest),Ruth
Eldridge,Tokositna,and Yentna.The largest glacier on the north side
is the 34-mile-long Muldrow.
The northern foothills of the Alaska Range consist of a series of
east-trending ridges,starting with the Kantishna Hills and running
eastward.Summit altitudes range generally between 2,000 and 4,500 feet.
The foothills vary from 3 to 7 miles in width and from 5 to 20 miles in
length.They are separated by broad flat valleys of glacial origin which
range from 2 to 10 miles in width.Beyond the northern foothills lies a
broad region of lowlands drained by the Tanana and the Kuskokwim
rivers.
The foothills that line the southern edge of the Alaska Range are
generally quite steep and are cut through by large south-flowing
glaciers.Southeast of the Alaska Range,across Broad Pass,are the
Talkeetna Mountains.Curry Ridge,which lies along the western edge of
these mountains,trends in a northeasterly direction,parallel to and
between the Chulitna and Susitna rivers.It is a gently rounded ridge
marked by past glacial activity,and it is generally 3,000 feet in
elevation.
To the south of the Alaska Range and west of the Talkeetna Mountains,
the broad Susitna River lowlands stretch out in a north-south direction.
Both the Susitna and the Yentna rivers drain this area where elevations
are less than 500 feet.
In terms of geology,the Denali area is one of the most interesting and
important in North America.It encompasses a region of diverse igneous,
metamorphic,and sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Recent to units
which may be as old as Precambrian.Wahrhaftig (Geological Survey 1965)
103
describes the internal structure of the Alaska Range as a synclinal
complex with Cretaceous rocks in its center and Paleozoic rocks on its
flanks.Longitudinal faults,the principal one being the Denali fault,
trend approximately parallel to the trend of the range.Fault traces are
marked by linear valleys,low passes,scarps,and sag ponds.The
Denali fault system is a major zone of fracturing which represents one of
the most fundamental geologic features on the continent.
South-central Alaska is one of the most seismically active areas in North
America.This region is part of a larger seismically active arc which
follows the coastline of the North Pacific and is known generally as the
Ring of Fire.The seismic activity is caused by the collision of two
tectonic plates.The Pacific plate is colliding with the continental plate
along the northern Pacific coastline.Numerous small faults which are
part of the Denali fault complex occur on the south side of the Alaska
Range.While these small faults themselves may not cause major
earthquake activity,activity in other areas could trigger subsidiary
movements within the area.In general,the potential for significant
damage as a result of earthquakes decreases from Anchorage toward the
interior.
Metamorphic rocks,which include schist,underlie much of the northern
foothill ridges and appear as isolated hills jutting above the
unconsolidated deposits in the Tanana-Kuskokwim lowlands.A Tertiary
rock sequence known as the Cantwell formation contains abundant volcanic
rocks.The upper portion of the Cantwell formation is predominantly
volcanic flows and tuffs.A thick conglomerate cover near the top of the
Tertiary rock section forms ridges where dips are steeper than 20
degrees and broad dissected plateaus where the conglomerate is
flat-lying .
Rocks in the central and southern portions of the park are characterized
by a sequence of predominantly dark gray argillite,slate,graywacke,
and a few intervals of limestone.
Tertiary sedimentary and volcanic rocks occupy lowlands north of the
range and also form east-west trending ridges along the northern flank of
the mountains.Much of the present topography within the region
probably resulted from erosion and removal of the relatively weaker
Tertiary rocks.
Granitic plutons (igneous rocks)support groups of high mountains that
have glacier-carved canyons and cirque headwalls rising almost vertically
to heights of 5,000 feet.The most rugged and scenically striking
landforms in the region are eroded granitic rocks.Notable examples
include Mount McKinley,Mount Foraker,the Cathedral Spires,and the
Great Gorge of the Ruth Glacier.The granitic rocks to the south of the
fault system are composed of quartz monzonite and granite between 55 and
60 millions years old,whereas rocks to the north of the system are
chiefly granodiorite 38 million years old.
Four periods of glaciation are recognized in the Denali region.On the
north side of the Alaska Range beyond the existing glaciers,morainal and
glacial outwash deposits extend into the foothills belt and cover large
104
areas of bedrock.Except for some valleys,the foothills section was
never glaciated.
South of the Alaska Range,the Cook Inlet-Susitna lowlands are covered
by ground moraines,drumlin fields,eskers,and glacial outwash plains.
Nearer to the mountains are broad flat valleys with sides that show a
glacial trim line.A few small rock-floored lakes occur throughout this
area.The largest is Chelatna Lake,which is 7 miles long.Bedrock
beneath the lowlands is mainly poorly consolidated Tertiary rocks which
are flat-lying or only slightly deformed.Mesozoic metamorphic and
granitic rocks occur as isolated mountains near the center of the lowland.
Mineral Resources and Mining
The complex sequence of tectonic,volcanic,and metamorphic activities
that has influenced the Denali region provides significant possibilities for
mineral deposits.While not enough is known to link the geology of the
area with specific levels of mineralization,recent studies have revealed
the occurrence of mineral resources within portions of the 1980 park
boundaries (NPS 1981 and 1983a).
Regional metal mining and prospecting during the early part of this
century were dominated by placer gold mining.Other metals were mined
in association with gold to a limited extent in the Kantishna area.From
the early 1970s to present time,a renewed interest in placer mining has
been evidenced within the region,particularly within the Kantishna
mining district.This area encompasses an elongated 40-mile,
northeast-trending mineralized belt known for silver and gold polysulfide
crosscutting veins,placer gold deposits,and also antimony and base
metal lodes.According to the probabilistic resource assessment method,
the average aggregate value of recoverable minerals for all deposit types
in the Kantishna Hills is estimated to be $781 million (ADNR,DGGS 1983,
Salisbury and Dietz 1983).Important mineral deposits are gold,silver,
antimony,lead,and zinc.
The Dunkle Mine township on the east side of the park is part of the
Chulitna-Yentna mining district,which is a significant base and precious
metal province to the south of the Alaska Range.Metals from the area
include copper,arsenic,gold,silver,tin,molybdenum,lead,and zinc.
No metal production has occurred in the Dunkle Mine township to date,
although the nearby Golden Zone Mine has produced gold,copper,and
silver.The abandoned Dunkle Mine,which is within the Dunkle Mine
township,produced 64,000 tons of coal from underground mining
operations during the period from 1940 until 1954.Coal reserves of up to
eight million tons are estimated in the Costello,Colorado,and Camp creek
basins.
North of the Alaska Range the park boundary encompasses the
westernmost portion of the Nenana coal field.Production began in the
Healy area in 1920 and today the Usibelli Mine produces over 700,000 tons
annually.The Healy area and points farther to the east overlie the major
segments of the coal field.Coal was once mined on a small scale near
Riley Creek to supply park facilities.
105
No production of oil or gas has occurred within the park,although
several outlying areas contain sedimentary basins and have,in the past,
been identified as possible petroleum provinces.Nonmetallic materials
including sand,gravel,limestone,perlite,clay,haydite,shale,and
argillite occur throughout the region,but the only extraction has been
for gravel,which was mined during the construction of the railroad and
highway.Deposits of limestone suitable for making cement occur near
Cantwell both in and out of the park.Clay,shale,and argillite
(components of insulating mineral wool)occur in the Windy Creek/Cantwell
area.
Hydrology
Flowing from all major glaciers within the park are large braided streams
whose waters are milky with glacial silt.Below various glaciers these
rivers cut intermingling channels,sometimes extending over two miles
wide.The most important rivers that have their headwaters in this
portion of the Alaska Range are the Foraker,McKinley,Toklat,
Teklanika,Savage,Chulitna,Kahiltna,and Yentna.Clear streams occur
sporadically throughout the area,oftentimes as tributaries to major glacial
streams or rivers.The sources of these streams are primarily snowmelt
and precipitation.
Mean annual runoff is from 1 to 2 cubic feet per second per square mile
in the lower elevations of the park.Suspended sediment concentrations
vary from 500 to 2,000 milligrams per liter for glacial streams and are
considerably less for nonglacial streams.Most of the sediment load is
carried during the summer months,and very little is carried during the
winter.Except in the Kantishna Hills,nearly all surface water is
potable,although iron is sometimes present in undesirable quantities.
However,boiling of surface water is necessary due to the presence of
Giardia .Summer flooding is common on the major streams.
Water for the various developed areas along the park road is generally'
taken from surface sources,but the park is gradually shifting to'
groundwater (well)sources to meet current standards.Five wells were-
drilled in 1981 in the vicinities of the ^Wonder Lake,Igloo,Sanctuary,and
Savage River campgrounds and the Wonder Lake ranger station.Wells
have generally been successful only in the unfrozen alluvium associated
with glacial rivers.Attempts to obtain deep groundwater at the park
headquarters and at the Riley Creek/hotel area have been unsuccessful
because permafrost inhibits the subsurface flow of water.Thus,surface
water and shallow groundwater sources will probably continue to provide
primary water supplies to developed areas within the park.
Because of glacial gouging and moraine formation,many large,deep lakes
would be expected in glaciated country such as this.However,within
the Denali region there are only two such lakes.Wonder Lake is within
the western boundary of former Mount McKinley National Park and is
approximately 2.5 miles long.Chelatna Lake is found just outside the
expanded park's southern boundary and is 7 miles in length.Numerous
small lakes are found scattered throughout the northwest portion of the
park.The largest lake in this area is Lake Minchumina,just outside the
park boundary.
;(jV
»
106
Climate
Denali National Park and Preserve is located in two of the major climatic
zones of Alaska.The Alaska Range plays a major role in influencing
climate by blocking much of the moisture that sweeps inland from the
Pacific Ocean and the Gulf of Alaska.A continental climate is formed to
the north of the range,while a transitional climate is formed to the
south.The north is characterized by less precipitation and greater
fluctuations in temperature (hotter in summer and much colder in winter)
than the area to the south.
Annual temperature extremes may range from 90 degrees to -52 degrees
Fahrenheit.The mean maximum temperatures at headquarters at the
eastern entrance to the park are 12.8 degrees for January and 65.9
degrees for July.The mean minimum temperatures for the same months
at this location are -5.2 degrees and 43.8 degrees,respectively.The
average 24-hour temperature spread during the summer months,June
through August,is only 22 degrees.Wider daily temperature ranges
occur during the winter months,with a record of 63 degrees.
Temperatures decrease with increases in elevation.Chill factors in
excess of -148 degrees have been experienced on the Mount McKinley
summit.
Table 5.Climatological Data
Temperature (°F)Precipitation (in.)Wind (knots)
Mean H igh/Low
Location Summer Winter Extreme Snow Total Average Extreme
Willow 40/70 -10/33 -55/90 --24 ----
Skwenta 44/69 -4/40 -50/90 119 29 ----
Talkeetna 44/68 0/40 -48/91 102 29 N 3.7 NE 33
Summit 40/60 -5/30 -45/89 119 20 NE 8.4 E 42
Park headquarters 41/64 -1/18 --76 15 --55
Healy 44/66 -3/26 -46/90 66 17 SE --
Clear 45/71 -28/14 -42/96 61 13 ----
Nenana 43/70 -17/12 -69/98 48 12 E 5.3 --
Precipitation is greater on the south side of the Alaska Range than on the
north side.Precipitation is greater in summer than in winter for the
entire region.Rainfall occurs on an average of 21 days during June,
July,and August at the Denali and Lake Minchumina recording stations,
on 45 days at Summit,and on 36 days at Talkeetna.The average annual
precipitation at park headquarters is slightly in excess of 15 inches;
snowfall there is 75.7 inches.
At higher elevations in the Alaska Range the total precipitation exceeds
80 inches in some locations and snowfall exceeds 400 inches.Normal
snowpack throughout the region averages between 20 and 40 inches.
109
Sudden showers and thunderstorms occasionally develop to the north of
the Alaska Range.Flash floods occur throughout the region.
Calm days are the rule in summer.Turbulance is more characteristic of
fall and winter.The maximum wind velocity recorded at headquarters is
60 miles per hour,but winds of this magnitude are rare.Winds in
excess of 100 miles per hour are not uncommon on Mount McKinley's
summit.
Mount McKinley's visibility (and frequent invisibility)depends on the
weather.North-trending winds commonly pile up clouds on the
mountain's south flank and then surround it.Because of its sheer
immensity and height,the mountain mass tends to generate its own
weather and cloud formation,even on days that may otherwise be clear.
Many visitors to the area go away disappointed,having never glimpsed
the mountain itself.A rough visibility index indicates that during the
three summer months the peak is totally obscured about 30 days,visible 4
hours or less about 30 days,and visible more than 4 hours another 30
days.It is a rarity when the peak is visible all or most of any one day.
It seems that the peak is hidden well over half of the time,and it is
often hidden for many successive days.
Weather is also an important factor in other forms of visitor use.The
peak visitor season is between June and mid-September.Cross-country
hiking may not be practical until early June,and snow may close the
park road by mid-September.Winters are extremely cold,particularly
north of the Alaska Range,although snow depths there rarely exceed 3
feet.Greater snow depths and somewhat milder winter temperatures to
the south of the range are more conducive to a broader range of winter
visitor use.Spring provides the best opportunity for cross-country
skiing,snowshoeing,and dogmushing.During the summer up to 18
hours of sunlight supply ample opportunity to enjoy the park,although
mosquitoes (most abundant in June and July)are a constant annoyance.
Early fall is one of the best seasons to visit Denali because there is a
better chance of fair weather,the landscape is brilliant with color,and
the animals begin to show their winter coats.
Soils
Soil types within the area vary as a result of parent material,
topography,and vegetative cover.Soils in the park can be generally
classified as mountain and tundra soils,bog soils,and forest soils.
Mountain or tundra soils form directly from bedrock and the slow
accumulation of organic matter.The sparseness of these soils is
attributable to cold weather extremes and steepness of slopes.Bog soils,
or histosols,consist of clay and glacial moraine and are poorly drained.
This causes,over time,the accumulation of plant material and often peat
layers.Forested areas within the park typically have soils of sandy and
silty clay with humus layers supporting mosses and lichens.
Permafrost (perennially frozen ground)is intermittently present
throughout the lowlands north of the Alaska Range and is continuous at
higher elevations both north and south of the range.Detailed studies of
110
the extent of permafrost in lowland areas to the south of the range have
not been made,but wells,roadcuts,and other past development within
the region have encountered permafrost at varying depths beneath the
surface.Exact permafrost thicknesses have not been documented,but
thicknesses of up to 100 feet have been recorded near the eastern
entrance to the park.
Permafrost essentially consists of soil,rock,or other earth materials at a
temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit or colder for two or more
consecutive years.A delicate heat balance exists between the permafrost
and the active layer above it.Thus,changes in the vegetative mat,
snow,or other characteristics of the upper layer can significantly alter
the thermal regime with resultant changes at ground level.For example,
removal of vegetation increases the release of heat from the ground in the
winter and prevents heat absorption into the ground in summer,and this
can cause the melting of permafrost.In addition,an increase in
solifluction,or soil movement,is possible.These phenomena can cause
heaving,sagging,soil slumping,and erosion at the surface during
successive periods of freeze and thaw in the active layer.The result can
be highly detrimental to buried cables and utility lines,paved surfaces,
roadbed foundations,buildings,and other developments.
Permafrost also poses problems for the disposal of liquid and solid waste.
Decay rates in frozen ground are extremely slow.Frozen ground is also
impermeable to subsurface flow of fluids because ice fills all rock or soil
pore spaces.
Vegetation
Vegetation within the park is similar to that found throughout the interior
of Alaska.The five major vegetation associations within the park and
preserve are low brush-bog,bottomland spruce-poplar forest,upland
spruce-hardwood forest,moist tundra,and alpine tundra.
Bogs are found within the river drainages and around the permanent
water bodies,often in association with black spruce.A broad lowland
area of bogs extends south and east of Lake Minchumina,along old river
terraces,outwash plains,and sloughs.
Interspersed within this lowland area,on relatively stable soils farther
back from the drainages,lie areas of bottomland spruce-poplar forest.
This plant association is dominated by white spruce and Alaska paper
birch,often in association with an understory of balsam poplar,willow,
and alder.Mosses,horsetails,and a variety of flowering plants are
common groundcover.
The tree line within the park is approximately 2,000 feet,except within
protected river valleys where it may extend to 3,000 feet.Between the
bottomland spruce-hardwood forest and tree line is an area of upland
spruce-hardwood forest.It is composed of white and black spruce,paper
birch,balsam poplar,quaking aspen,larch,and willow.Species
composition is uniform over large areas,but certain species are locally
dominant.Paper birch,a major constituent of most interior Alaska
111
forested lands,is not abundant in the region but forms significant stands
in the northernmost portions of the park.Quaking aspen occurs
principally on well-drained uplands in small scattered stands mixed with
white spruce.Dense stands of white spruce are found principally along
the banks of large rivers.Balsam poplar,an early invader of
floodplains,is mainly restricted to gravelly riverbottom sites.Black
spruce covers large areas in the northern part of the park.A variety of
other species occur in association with the upland forest.These can
include little tree willow,flatleaf willow,resin birch,American green
alder,thinleaf alder,Alaska rose,bush cinquefoil,red currant,and
shrubs such as cranberry,blueberry,and lingonberry.Mosses and
lichens are abundant on the forest floor.
At higher elevations (usually above 2,000 feet)the spruce-hardwood
association gives way to a dwarf shrub and moist tundra association.This
association,which occurs extensively along the foothills of the vast
Alaska Range,usually forms a complete groundcover dominated by dwarf
birch and willow.Blueberry,Labrador tea,bearberry,alpine azalea,and
crowberry are common in this moist tundra zone.In addition,grasses
and sedges are oftentimes found in nearly continuous stands in the wetter
areas.
Alpine tundra,low-growing mats composed of herbaceous and shrubby
plants,grows where a thin soil mantle is present with frequent outcrops
of bare rock.It includes mat and cushion tundra,tussock tundra,and
dwarf shrub vegetation associations.Species composition varies from
almost continuous cottongrass tussocks with a sparse growth of sedges
and dwarf shrubs,to stands where dwarf shrubs dominate.Often found
in the alpine tundra are mountain avens,bearberry,crowberry,ground
willows,alpine azalea,and lingonberry.On the highest and rockiest
areas,below the zone of barren rock and ice,lichens are found in
abundance.Lichens are slow-growing plants which are highly sensitive
to any disturbance.
In general,the extensive glacier and drainage system,the greater
precipitation levels,and the varied physiographic features to the south of
the Alaska Range support a somewhat more varied and diverse range of
plant associations than what are found on the north side of the range.
Two plant species reported to occur within or near the park and preserve
have been cited as potentially eligible for the list of threatened or
endangered species.These are Taraxacum carneocoloratum and
Smelowskia borealis var.villosa ,both reported to occur along dry
ridgelines at high elevations (see appendix J).
Wildlife
The park hosts a wide variety and abundance of wildlife.Prominent
large mammal species include moose,Dall sheep,grizzly bear,wolf,and
caribou.These large mammals occur within the park in greater
concentrations north of the Alaska Range than south of the range.
Greater habitat variety and less permanent snow and ice on the north
side may be responsible for these differences in concentrations.Other
112
BOTTOMLAND SPRUCE-POPLAR FOREST
SPRUCE HARDWOOD FOREST
LOW BRUSH BOG
TUSSOCK TUNDRA
ALPINE TUNDRA AND BARREN GROUND
smaller mammal species are beaver,red fox,hoary marmot,coyote,
collared pika,arctic ground squirrel,red squirrel,snowshoe hare,lynx,
otter,porcupine,marten,wolverine,weasel,several mice,lemming,and
vole.
Moose are abundant the year around within and near the numerous
drainages throughout the park.Moose are particularly abundant within
the broad drainages on the south side of the Alaska Range,particularly
within the Tokositna,Ruth,and upper Yentna drainages.The Yentna
drainage alone supports approximately 300 moose (Troyer 1979).They
browse primarily on willow,dwarf birch,and alder.Sedges,horsetails,
and other plants are also eaten in the spring.Moose are unpredictable in
behavior and can be dangerous if casually approached by visitors.This
is particularly true of rutting males and females with young.
Caribou are migrating herd animals which utilize varying habitats for
wintering,calving (late May to early June),summer range,and rutting
(September and October).Such plants as willow,dwarf birch,and
lichens constitute much of the caribou diet.The Denali caribou herd
ranks 13th in size of the 22 Alaskan herds.Because of its accessibility
it is also the most frequently viewed and photographed.This herd,
which was determined to consist of 20,000 to 30,000 animals from 1900 to
the early 1940s,has declined dramatically in numbers since that time.
Today,the population appears to number approximately 2,600 animals.
The reasons for the decline are speculative and may include emigration,
habitat quality,predation,hunting,and herd condition.
An area south of the crest of the Alaska Range,south of the town of
Cantwell and between the middle and west forks of the Chulitna River,is
a prime calving and post-calving ground for caribou.From 1975 to 1980
this area received significantly more use than other calving areas north of
the range.Since 1980 the northern calving areas have been more
significant.The critical use period for the Cantwell calving ground is
from about May 1 through July 20.After calving,the herd moves to the
north side of the Alaska Range,passing through Polychrome Flats as
early as July.Movements then follow a traditional migration route west
and north to summer and winter ranges.When the herd calves north of
the Alaska Range,most cows still travel to the Cantwell area
approximately the first week in June and migrate back to the north from
early to mid July.The significance of the southern area as a
post-calving destination is not understood.
Both grizzly and black bears inhabit the area,which provides abundant
food including various berries,roots,sedges,and grasses.Salmon is
also taken during spawning times in a few areas.Grizzly bears utilize
high alpine areas for denning and are dormant from October until April.
Wolves exist in and out of the park on both sides of the Alaska Range.
They,along with bears,occupy the top of the predator/prey pyramid in
Denali's large mammal ecosystem.Wolves travel in packs and prey upon
moose,caribou,Dall sheep,and small mammals.The young are born in
dens excavated into hillsides.
115
Wolverines are relatively abundant within central Alaska,although they
never occur in great abundance compared to other furbearers.The
wolverine is a member of the weasel family and feeds on everything from
carrion to berries in all major vegetation associations.The lynx,Alaska's
only native cat,inhabits the lowland forests and wetlands.It preys
largely upon snowshoe hares,and cycles in the hare population directly
affect the lynx population.
Denali's birdlife includes a variety of migratory waterfowl.Nonmigratory
birds include chickadee,raven,magpie,woodpecker,ptarmigan,and
owls.Trumpeter swans,formerly listed as endangered species,frequent
floodplain meadows and small ponds.
Fish species include several salmon (king,coho,chum,),arctic char,
Dolly Varden,whitefish,burbot,northern pike,sheefish,and grayling.
The only amphibian known to inhabit the area is the wood frog.Insects,
including mosquitoes and various biting gnats,are prevalent in muskegs,
drainages,and at lower elevations where winds are reduced by
topography and vegetation.On higher hills and knolls in more exposed
areas,winds tend to disperse insects.
In general the wildlife to the south of the Alaska Range is less abundant
and less visible than the wildlife along the park road corridor to the
north.The existing park road follows a broad tundra valley north of the
range and traces portions of a traditional caribou migration route.The
dominant low mat vegetation and steep rock cliffs flanking segments of the
route facilitate the viewing of large mammals (primarily caribou,Dall
sheep,and grizzly bear)at great distances.
Most areas to the south of the range are not expansive and open and
thus do not afford a comparable viewing experience.Instead,wildlife
viewing on the south side occurs within more enclosed spaces,as for
example,sighting a moose in a small pond within a lowland forest area.
Other species readily observable,particularly along drainages,are bear,
beaver,and numerous small mammals.Wolf,wolverine,and coyote are
wary of humans and are not often seen.Waterfowl,including trumpeter
swans,are found in ponds and wetter areas.While access remains a
major obstacle for most south-side fishing,the potential is greater than in
rivers and streams which intersect the park road.
No threatened or endangered wildlife species is known to inhabit or
migrate through the park and preserve.Grizzlies,wolves,and the
golden and bald eagles are not considered threatened or endangered in
Alaska (see appendix J).
CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT
The Denali region has fostered a rich prehistory and history of human
occupation.However,the exact extent of human activity is not yet fully
known,given the awesome dimensions of Mount McKinley and its flanks of
lesser mountains,foothills,glacial canyons,and river valleys.Further
archeological surveys and academic studies are needed to develop a
comprehensive picture of human activity in the Denali region.
116
^^^H GENERAL DISTRIBUTION
—FALL AND WINTER CONCENTRATIONS
DALL SHEEP
f**^*}GENERAL DISTRIBUTION
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OF BLACK AND BROWN BEAR
BLACK BEAR INTENSIVE USE
BROWN BEAR INTENSIVE USE
KNOWN OR SUSPECTED DENNING
OVERLAP OF INTENSIVE USE
^^^H GENERAL DISTRIBUTION
CARIBOU
f**^GENERAL DISTRIBUTION
l |l[|
|[|[
-CALVING
TRUMPETER SWAN
I SIGHTINGS AND NESTING AREAS
WILDLIFE
RESOURCES
Uniied Stales Department
National Park Service
4
|
2q>ao
Archeology and Ethnography
In very early times,10,000 to 20,000 years ago,the northern sector of
the park was on the margin of the Beringian steppe,where Pleistocene
megafauna could support big game hunters of Siberian origin.
Representations of this earliest culture are found in the early man site
just outside the park boundary at Dry Creek,west of Healy.There,
artifactual remains have been determined to be older than 10,500 BP,thus
constituting one of the more important archeological discoveries in Alaska.
The significance of this site has drawn considerable archeological attention
to the area.A large stone spear point was recently found in the west
end of the park,indicating the potential for an equivalent site to be
found and dated within the park.
Prehistorically,the land comprising Denali National Park and Preserve was
sparsely populated,reflecting the low biological productivity of the land
and the geography of this border region between Pacific systems and the
interior.Large game animals--the principal food source--were widely
scattered,and thus,occupation was on an intermittent seasonal basis.
Concentrating on obtaining the necessities of life,the inhabitants were
likely migratory,seasonally following and intercepting herds of big game,
especially caribou.
These bands left scanty remains at their temporary camps and game
lookout points in the form of lithic scatterings.Thus,archeologists have
been unable to determine the specific Alaska cultural tradition they
represent.The archeological evidence gathered to date suggests
representations of the American Paleoarctic tradition (Denali complex),the
Northern Archaic tradition (possibly the Arctic Small Tool tradition),and
prehistoric and historic Athapascans.The most definitive archeological
remains,located within the Teklanika archeological district,are
considered type sites for the Denali complex of the American Paleoarctic
tradition,representing a people who preyed upon herds of grazing
mammals in Beringia during the early Holocene.
More recently,Athapascan groups exploited this region,centering upon
the Susitna,Tanana,and Kuskokwim river systems.At the time of
European contact,three major Alaska native groups occupied the area:
the Tanaina and Tanana Indians and the Ingalik.A mixing of Eskimo and
Athapascan cultures may have taken place in the upper Kuskokwim River
drainage before Russian exploration.
Native villages within the Denali region are known to have existed at
McGrath,Telida,Nikolai,Lake Minchumina,and along the Tanana River
and its tributaries.Another village may have been situated 50 miles
southeast of Cantwell.
To these natives living in the region two centuries ago,the majestic snow
covered peak towering above all others was known by various
names--Denali,Trolike,Tenada,Trelaka--all meaning the great or high
mountain.The foreigners drawn to the area in search of wealth (from
furs to be harvested or minerals to be prospected)were not aware or
apparently not interested in the great size of the mountains of the
interior Alaska Range.It was not until 1896,spurred by a minor gold
119
rush in the area,that prospector William Dickey arrived and drew public
attention to the lofty peak,estimating its height at 20,000 feet.He
named the mountain Mckinley after William Mckinley,presidential candidate
and fellow proponent of the gold standard.Thus,Mount Mckinley was
recognized as the "summit of North America."
History
The first sighting of Mount Mckinley by nonnatives occurred in 1794 when
George Vancouver saw "distant stupendous mountains"from the knik Arm
of Cook Inlet.
Russian explorer-traders were the first nonnatives to visit the Mount
Mckinley region.Vassili Malakoff of the Russian American Company
ascended the Susitna River in the early 1800s in search of furs and
reached the area now comprising Denali State Park.Russians also came
up the kuskokwim River,setting up a few trading posts along its banks.
Their initial ascendancy of the upper kuskokwim took place in 1830,and
arrival in the Mckinley region occurred around 1842.The upper
kuskokwim was not attractive to the Russians,and so the trading posts
were soon abandoned.
Despite the early European observations and tentative explorations,the
Denali region remained virtually unknown to modern explorers until the
late 19th century.
Alaska was purchased by the United States in 1867,but
government-backed exploration of the area did not occur until 1898,when
George Eldridge,geologist,and Robert Muldrow,topographer,of the
United States Geological Survey approached Mount Mckinley from the
south to measure its elevation.Twenty-five years later the general route
taken by Eldridge and Muldrow was followed during construction of the
Alaska Railroad.Also in 1898 Sargent William Yanert crossed the Alaska
Range through Broad Pass,making him the first white man to set foot in
what is today Denali National Park and Preserve.
Another USGS party,headed by Alfred H.Brooks,set out in 1902 to
survey the geology of the MckinleyNmassif .This party circled nearly the
entire base of the mountain and was the first to visit the local native
tribes and to set foot on Mckinley's lower slopes.
One year later,in 1903,Judge James Wickersham and party attempted the
first ascent up Mount Mckinley.The attempt was unsuccessful,reaching
only 8,000 feet before turning back.At least 11 more expeditions would
fall short of the summit before it was finally reached by the
Stuck-karstens expedition in 1913.
In 1905 placer gold was discovered on Moose Creek and in the kantishna
Hills,luring thousands of miners to the north side of Mckinley.After a
frenzied summer of prospecting,most miners moved onto other areas,
while the handful of lucky miners who had struck pay dirt remained.
120
In 1915 construction was underway on a railroad which would connect
Seward with Fairbanks.Construction camps sprang up along the line
with the advance of the project.Train depots and roadhouses arose
along the railway and small settlements developed at the train stops.
The metal prospecting and related geological and travel route surveys
brought the mountain and its varied wildlife to public attention.Widely
publicized mountaineering expeditions and naturalist Charles Sheldon's
early movements to protect the animals of the Denali wilderness led to
national park designation in 1917.The boundary included the top and
north side of the McKinley massif as well as the northern flank of the
Alaska Range.Automobile access within the park was provided in 1938,
upon the completion of the McKinley National Park road.Visitors then
brought their cars via the railroad.Almost 20 years later,in 1957,the
Denali Highway connected the park road to the Richardson Highway and
the rest of the Alaska road system.With the completion of the George
Parks Highway in 1972,travel time from Anchorage and Fairbanks was
greatly reduced,and in anticipation of greatly increased visitor use,the
National Park Service instituted a free shuttle bus service along the park
road and prohibited most private vehicle travel.
Significant Cultural Resources
There are approximately 100 known cultural sites and structural units or
complexes located within Denali National Park and Preserve.Though this
may constitute only a fraction of what actually exists within the park,
these cultural resources illustrate most major elements of the region's
prehistory and history,representing themes from early man to modern
Euro-American occupation.
Many cultural sites relate to prehistoric occupation of migratory big game
hunters who used the area on an intermittent seasonal basis possibly as
early as 10,000 years ago.Two sites,Teklanika East (HEA-001)and
Teklanika West (HEA-002),comprise the Teklanika archeological district,
which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.The
significance of this district is its archetypal site representation of the
Denali complex of the Paleoarctic tradition--a people who preyed upon
herds of grazing mammals in the Beringia during the early Holocene.
Two additional prehistoric sites containing lithic remains of early hunters
have been determined potentially eligible for nomination to the National
Register of Historic Places.Alaska heritage resource site MMK-028 is
located on a hilltop near the confluence of Willow Creek and Moose Creek.
MMK-027 is situated on a hill west of Rainy Creek.
Of additional archeological significance is an early man site at Dry Creek,
located just outside the park boundaries.Listed on the National Register
of Historic Places,this site has produced the earliest evidence of culture
in the Denali region,and its proximity to the park suggests such
prehistoric site potential therein.
Other sites relating to prehistoric use of Denali have been identified in
the vicinity of the park road corrider on the Savage and Sanctuary
121
rivers,along the upper reaches of the Susitna and Nenana river valleys,
and at Telida,Minchumina,and Stephan lakes.The scanty remains of
these brief encampments do not lend themselves to precise classification
within a specific Alaska cultural tradition,and their overall significance is
yet unclear.
Many of the significant historic structures relate to two distinct but often
interrelated themes:mining and subsistence hunting and trapping.The
majority of these surviving structures,which date between 1905 and 1935,
are located in the Kantishna mining district.Based on a recent field
study of this area,the National Park Service and the Alaska state
historic preservation officer have determined the following structures are
potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places:
Kantishna roadhouse (unknown)
Fanny Quigley residence (unknown)
Busia's cabin (1920s)
Banjo Mill (1936)
Upper Caribou Creek (1920s)
Glacier City (1905-06)
Stampede Mine (1936-41)
The first four sites are privately owned.
The administrative history of the park is represented by two complexes of
structures which are in the process of being nominated to the National
Register of Historic Places.The park headquarters area is comprised of
several buildings,including the park headquarters (1935),the east
district ranger office (1928),the warehouse (1932),the dog kennels
(1929),and the interpretive building (1928).
Other historic structures potentially eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places are the patrol cabins in the interior of the
park dating from 1924 to 1939.
EXISTING VISITOR USE
The large visitation statistics at Denali National Park and Preserve are a
reflection of the park complex's strategic location between Anchorage and
Fairbanks,its long history in the national park system,and its easy
access.Visitors can arrive at Denali via private vehicle,tour bus,
railroad,or aircraft.A landing strip at Riley Creek accommodates small
planes.
Currently,almost all visitor facilities are confined to the 88.5-mile-long
park road corridor and near the park entrance along the George Parks
Highway.The National Park Service operates seven campgrounds with a
combined total of 225 campsites.Other overnight accommodations are
provided inside the boundary by privately operated lodges and a
concessioner-operated hotel.Camp Denali and the North Face Lodge,
both privately owned,are located near the end of the park road in
Kantishna.Camp Denali offers cabin accommodations for approximately 43
people,while the North Face Lodge has 15 motel-style rooms.Recently,
122
the Kantishna Roadhouse has reopened for use and provides several
rental cabins.Denali National Park Hotel (formerly McKinley Park Station
Hotel),near the entrance to the park,offers a variety of accommodations
with a capacity of 120 double rooms and 21 single rooms.Several
additional commercial operations near the park entrance and adjacent to
the park boundary provide lodging,camping,and associated visitor
services for tourists to Denali.
The activities of visitors reflect the available access corridors and
facilities.The majority of visitor use occurs along the park road corridor
between Riley Creek and Wonder Lake.A shuttle bus system operates
during the peak visitor use season.This transportation system performs
two principal functions.It provides an opportunity for visitors to
experience the park (primarily viewing wildlife and Mount McKinley)and
it also provides access into the park's interior for backcountry users.In
addition to the NPS park shuttle bus system,the concessioner offers
wildlife tours along the park road,and the three lodges in Kantishna
provide transportation from the park entrance to their facilities.
Visitor travel along the road corridor is by necessity controlled,and only
those with camping permits or special use permits are allowed access in
private vehicles.Even with the transportation systems and other controls
to minimize wildlife disturbance,traffic volume along the road doubled
between 1971 and 1979.
Visitation to Denali has grown remarkably since the area was established
as a national park (see table 6).The extraordinary increase that
occurred in 1972 was the result of the completion of the George Parks
Highway and the ease of access it provided between Anchorage,
Fairbanks,and the park.The past decade has witnessed continued
growth in visitation,with recorded use almost quadrupling from 1972 to
1983.
Table 6:Annual Visitation,1922-1984
Year Total Recreation Visits
1922 7
1932 400
1942 5
1952 7,300
1962 16,600
1972 88,615
1973 137,418
1974 161,427
1975 160,600
1976 157,612
1977 170,031
1978 222,993
1979 251,105
1980 216,341
1981 256,593
1982 321,868
1983 346,082
1984 1 394,426
123
Visitation to Denali is highly seasonal,with 93 percent of the total annual
use occurring during the months of June,July,August,and September
(see table 7).
Table 7.Seasonal Use Patterns,1980
Month Total Recreational Visits
January 198
February 146
March 401
April 633
May 12,791
June 27,623
July 61,963
August 73,791
September 36,250
October 1,564
November 828
December 153
Total 216,341
124
CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
The process of developing the general management plan for Denali began
in earnest in May 1983.The initial effort consisted of discussions
between the planning team and the park to determine the range of issues
at Denali National Park and Preserve and the best approach to be taken
for this planning effort.The conclusion of these discussions was that
the major problems facing Denali were the increasing level of visitors
attracted to the park,the ramifications of increased use on the
preservation of the park's resources,and how recreational activities might
best be accommodated as demand accelerated in the future.As a result
the planning effort principally focused on examining the south side of
Denali for opportunities to support development and for its recreational
potential
.
During the 1983 summer season,field trips were scheduled to explore
various sites on the south side.In conjunction with the field studies,
informal meetings were scheduled with knowledgeable and interested
parties to present the approach being taken on the plan and to gain an
understanding of any concerns that might be evident.These meetings
included representatives of state agencies,the native organizations,and
conservation groups.
The proposal for the south side of Denali relies heavily upon the Alaska
state park system for the implementation of an activity center in Denali
State Park.Several meetings were held with the Alaska Division of
Parks,both in the field and in Anchorage.The purpose of these
meetings was to explain the approach,gauge any interest the state might
have in the proposal,and provide periodic updates on the progress of
the project.The contacts with the Alaska Division of Parks eventually
resulted in the memorandum of understanding presented in appendix E.
In accordance with the revised programmatic memorandum of agreement
between the National Park Service,the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation,and the Council of State Historic Preservation Officers,the
National Park Service has sought the advice of the Advisory Council and
the state historic preservation officer during the formulation of this plan.
The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service was contacted for information
regarding endangered or threatened plant or animal species within or
adjacent to Denali National Park and Preserve (see appendix J).
Finally,as the project evolved,a planning newsletter was published and
distributed to all individuals and agencies on the mailing list for Denali
National Park and Preserve.The newsletter was released in February
1984,and generally indicated the scope of the plan,issues to be
discussed,and a projected timeframe for completion of the project.
Copies of this document have been forwarded to all federal,state,and
local agencies concerned with Denali National Park and Preserve.
Additionally copies have been sent to all interested parties and individuals
on the mailing list for Denali.The responses will be utilized in any
necessary revisions prior to release of a final plan.
125
APPENDIX A:THE MANDATE FOR DENALI
ESTABLISHMENT
The central portion of Denali was originally dedicated as Mount McKinley
National Park on February 26,1917,and "set apart as a public park for
the benefit and enjoyment of the people."Congress specified that the
park was established to serve as a "game refuge,"and the secretary of
the interior was directed to manage it for "the freest use ...for
recreation purposes by the public and for the preservation of animals,
birds,and fish and ...the natural curiosities and scenic beauties
thereof."Subsequent legislation expanded the park boundaries and
allocated funds "for the adequate housing,feeding,and transportation of
the visiting public and residents."
In 1978 President Carter ordered extensive additions to the park,and
using the central Alaskan native name for the "High One,"he designated
the area Denali National Monument.With the passage of the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (PL 96-487,section 202(3)(a))
on December 2,1980,the former park with slightly modified additions was
redesignated by Congress as Denali National Park and Preserve.
CONGRESSIONAL INTENT
All the new additions to the national park system established by ANILCA
were to be administered,like all other NPS units,pursuant to the act of
August 25,1916,which created the National Park Service (39 Stat.535,
as amended and supplemented in 16 USC 1,et seq.).That act states
that lands within the system will be managed "to conserve scenery and
the natural and historic objects and the wildlife ...and to provide for
the enjoyment of the same in such a manner and by such means as will
leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
Specific to Denali,Congress stated that the intent was
to protect and interpret the entire mountain massif,and additional
scenic mountain peaks and formations;and to protect habitat for,
and populations of fish and wildlife including,but not limited to,
brown/grizzly bears,moose,caribou,Dall sheep,wolves,swans and
other waterfowl;and to provide continued opportunities,including
reasonable access,for mountain climbing,mountaineering and other
wilderness recreational activities (ANILCA,sec.202 (3)(a)).
SUBSISTENCE AND SPORT HUNTING
The congressional guidance for the management of subsistence and sport
hunting and trapping differs for the original park and for the new park
and preserve additions.Within former Mount McKinley National Park,
where all hunting was prohibited at the time of the passage of ANILCA,
such use (and any associated shelters and equipment)will continue to be
prohibited.Subsistence harvests are authorized within the new park and
preserve additions,pursuant to title VIM of ANILCA.Local rural
127
residents engaged in a subsistence lifestyle may continue to do so in a
manner consistent witin the perpetuation of natural and healthy wildlife
populations (ANILCA,section 815).Sport hunting and trapping are
prohibited on all park lands,including the new park additions,but they
are permitted on preserve lands.With this exception,the preserve is
managed the same as the national park.ANILCA created a subsistence
resource commission and charged it with establishing a subsistence
hunting plan for the park.The commission's recommendations will be
forwarded to the secretary of the interior for review and implementation
in accordance with section 808(b)of the act.
In accordance with section 1316(b)of ANILCA,the National Park Service
proposes not to allow the establishment on public lands of any new "tent
platforms,shelters and other temporary facilities and equipment directly
and necessarily related to"the taking of fish and wildlife in Denali
National Preserve.Such new facilities or equipment would constitute a
significant expansion of existing facilities or uses that would be
detrimental to the purposes for which the preserve was established.
Temporary structures in support of subsistence activities are authorized
under existing regulations (36 CFR 13.17).
MINING AND MINERAL DEVELOPMENT
Mining within the park was first addressed in the 1917 park enabling
legislation,which stipulated that existing valid claims and entry and
location rights could not be affected by park designation and that
existing mineral land laws,in particular the Mining Law of 1872,would
continue to apply to all lands within the boundary.Subsequent
legislation in 1931 (46 Stat.1043)authorized the secretary of the interior
to prescribe regulations for the surface use of lands within Mount
McKinley provided that no one was denied entrance to the park for
prospecting and mining purposes.
The Mining in the Parks Act of 1976 (PL 94-429,16 USC 21-54)closed
the park to any further mineral entry and location and placed a four-year
moratorium on surface disturbance for mineral explorations and
development of existing valid claims.This legislation also required that
unpatented claims within the park boundary be recorded,and that the
secretary of the interior recommend to Congress whether any valid or
patented claims should be acquired by the federal government.The act
also precipitated the promulgation of federal regulations governing all
mining activities on patented or valid unpatented mining claims in all NPS
areas.These regulations (36 CFR 9A)enable the National Park Service
to prevent or minimize damage to resource values through control of
mining activities.
ANILCA,section 206,withdrew all federal lands within Alaskan units of
the national park system from mineral entry and location and from
disposition under the mineral leasing laws,subject to valid existing
rights.
128
APPENDIX B:FEDERAL REGULATIONS
31854 Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday,June 17,1981 /Rules and Regulations
PART 13—NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM
UNITS IN ALASKA
Subpart A—Public Use and Recreation
Sec.
13.1 Definitions.
13.2 Applicability and scope.
13.3 Penalties.
13.4 Information collection.
13.10 Snowmachines.
13.11 Motorboats.
13.12 Nonmotcrized surface transportation.
13.13 Aircraft
13.14 Off-road vehicles.
13.15 Access to inholdings.
13.16 Temporary access.
13.17 Cabins and other structures.
13.18 Camping and picnirJcing.
13.19 Weapons,traps and nets.
13.20 Preservation of natural features.
13.21 Taking of fish and wildlife.
13.22 Unattended or abandoned property.
13.30 Closure procedures.
13.31 Permits.
Subpart B—Subsistence
13.40 Purpose and policy.
13.41 Applicabihty.
13.42 Definitions.
13.43 Determination of resident zones.
13.44 Subsistence permits for persons who
permanently reside outside a resident
zone.
13.45 Prohibition on aircraft use.
13.46 Use of snowmobiles,motorboats,dog
teams,and other means of surface
transportation traditionally employed by
local rural residents engaged in
subsistence uses.
13.47 Subsistence fishing.
13.48 Subsistence hunting and trapping-
13.49 Subsistence use of timber and plant
material.
13.50 Closure to subsistence uses.
13.51 Application procedures for
subsistence permits and aircraft
exceptions.
Subpart C—Special Regulations—Specific
Park Areas In Alaska
13.60 Aniakchak National Monument and
Preserve.
13.61 Bering Land Bridge National Preserve.
13.62 Cape Krusenstem National
Monument.
13.63 Denali National Park and Preserve.
13.64 Gates of the Arctic National Park and
Preserve.
13 65 Glacier Bay National Park and
Preserve.
13.66 Katmai National Park and Preserve.
13.67 Kenai Fjords National Park.
13.68 Klondike Gold Rush National
Historical Park.
13.69 Kobuk Valley National Park.
13.70 Lake Clark National Park and
Preserve.
13.71 Noatak National Preserve.
13.72 rbitka National Historical Park.
13.73 Wrangell-SL Elias National Park and
Preserve.
13.74 Yukon-Charley Rivers National
Preserve.
Authoritjr Sec.3 of the Act of August 15,
1916 (39 Stat.535.as amended (16 U.S.C.3):
16 U.S.C.1.la-1,Ic,462):Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA),
94 Stat 2371 and 1281;Pub.L No.96--i87
(December 2,1980);and the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980.94 Stat.2812.Pub.L
No.96-511.
Subpart A —Public Use and Recreation
§13.1 Definitions.
The following definitions shall apply
to all regulations contained in this part:
(a)The term "adequate and feasible
access"means a reasonable method and
route of pedestrian or vehicular
transportation which is economically
practicable for achieving the use or
development desired by the applicant on
his/her non-federal land or occupancy
interest,but does not necessarily mean
the least costly alternative.
(b)The term "aircraft"means a
machine or device that is used or
intended to be used to carry persons or
objects in flight through the air,
including,but not limited to airplanes,
helicopters and gliders.
(c)The term "ANILCA"means the
Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act {94 Stat.2371;Pub.L.
96-487 (December 2,1980)).
(d)The term "carry"means to wear,
bear or carry on or about the person and
additionally,in the case of firearms,
within or upon a device or animal used
for transportation.
(e)The term "downed aircraft"means
an aircraft that as a result of mechanical
failure or accident cannot take off.
(f)The term "firearm"means any
loaded or unloaded pistol,revolver,rifle,
shotgun or other weapon which will or
is designated to or may readily be
converted to expel a projectile by the
action of expanded gases,except that it
does not include a pistol or rifle
powered by compressed gas.The term
"firearm"also includes irritant gas
devices.
(g)The term "fish and wildlife"means
any member of the animal kingdom.
129
Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday.June 17.1981 /Rules and Regulations 31855
including without limitation any
mammal,fish,bird (including any
migratory,nonmigratory or endangered
bird for which protection is also
afforded by treaty or other international
agreement),amphibian,reptile.moUusk.
crustacean,arthropod,or other
invertebrate,and includes any part,
produce,egg.or offspring thereof,or the
dead body or part thereof.
(h)The term "fossil"means any
remains,impression,or trace of any
animal or plant of past geological ages
that has been preserved,by natural
processes,in the earth's crust.
(i)The term "gemstone"means a
silica or igneous mineral including,but
not limited to (1)geodes,(2)petrified
wood,and (3)jade,agate,opal,garnet,
or other mineral that when cut and
polished is customarily used as jewelry
or other ornament.
(j)The term "National Preserve"shall
include the following areas of the
National Park System:
Aiagnak National Wild and Scenic River.
Aniakchak National Preserve,Bering Land
Bridge National Preserve,Denali National
Preserve,Gates of the Arctic National
Preserve,Glacier Bay National Preserve.
Katmai National Preserve,Lake Clark
National Preserve,Noatak National Preserve,
Wrangell-St.Elias National Preserve,and
Yukon-Charley National Preserve.
(k)The term "net"means a seine,
weir,net wire,fish trap,or other
implement designed to entrap fish,
except a landing net.
(1)The term "off-road vehicle"means
any motor vehicle designed for or
capable of crosscountry travel on or
immediately over land,water,sand,
snow.ice.marsh,wetland or other
natural terrain,except snowmachines or
snowmobiles as defined in this chapter.
(m)The term "park areas"means
lands and waters administered by the
National Park Service within the State
of Alaska.
(n)The term "person"means any
individual,firm,corporation,society,
association,partnership,or any private
or public body.
(0)The term "possession"means
exercising dominion or control,with or
without ownership,over weapons,traps,
nets or other property.
(p)The term "public lands"means
lunds situated in Alaska which are
federally owned lands,except
—
(1)land selections of the State of
.-\laska which have been tentatively
approved or validly selected under the
Alaska Statehood Act (72 Stat.339)and
lands which have been confirmed to,
\alidly selected by,or granted to the
Territory of Alaska or the State under
any other provision of Federal law;
(2)land selections of a Native
Corporation made under the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act (85 Stat,
688)which have not been conveyed to a
Native Corporation,unless any such
selection is determined to be invalid or
is relinquished:and
(3)lands referred to in section 19(b)of
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act.
(q)The term "snowmachine"or
"snowmobile"means a self-propelled
vehicle intended for off-road travel
primarily on snow having a curb weight
of not more than 1,000 pounds (450 kg),
driven by a track or tracks in contact
with the snow and steered by a ski or
skis on contact with the snow.
(r)The term "Superintendent"means
any National Park Service official in
charge of a park area,the Alaska
Regional Director of the National Park
Service,or an authorized representative
of either.
(s)The term "take"or "taking"as
used with respect to fish and wildlife,
means to pursue,hunt,shoot,trap,net.
capture,collect,kill,harm,or attempt to
engage in any such conduct.
(t)The term "temporary"means a
continuous period of time not to exceed
12 months,except as specifically
provided otherwise.
(u)The term "trap"means a snare,
trap.mesh,or other implement designed
to entrap animals other than fish.
(v)The term "unload"means there is
no unexpended shell or cartridge in the
chamber or magazine of a firearm;
bows,crossbows and spearguns are
stored in such a manner as to prevent
their ready use:muzzle-loading weapons
do not contain a powder charge;and
any other implement capable of
discharging a missile into the air or
under the water does not contain a
missile or similar device within the
loading or discharging mechanism.
(w)The term "weapon"means a
firearm,compressed gas or spring
powered pistol or rifle,bow and arrow,
crossbow,blow gun,speargun,hand
thrown spear,slingshot,explosive
device,or any other implement designed
to discharge missiles into the air or
under the water.
§13.2 Applicability and scope.
(a)The regulations contained in this
Part 13 are prescribed for the proper use
and management of park areas in
Alaska and supplement the general
regulations of this chapter.The general
regulations contained in this chapter are
applicable except as modified by this
Part 13.
(b)Subpart A of this Part 13 contains
regulations applicable to park areas.
Such regulations amend in part the
general regulations contained in this
chapter.The regulations in Subpart A
govern use and management,including
subsistence activities,within the park
areas,except as modified by Subparts B
or C.
(c)Subpart B of this Part 13 contains
regulations applicable to subsistence
activities.Such regulations apply to park
areas except Kenai Fjords National
Park,Katmai National Park,Glacier Bay
National Park,Klondike Gold Rush
National Historical Park,Sitka National
Historical Park,and parts of Denali
National Park.The regulations in
Subpart B amend in part the general
regulations contained in this chapter
and the regulations contained in Subpart
A of this Part 13.
(d)Subpart C of this Part 13 contains
special regulations for specific park
areas.Such regulations amend in part
the general regulations contained in this
chapter and the regulations contained in
Subparts A and B of this Part 13.
(e)The regulations contained in this
Part 13 are applicable only on federally
owned lands within the boundaries of
any park area.For purposes of this part,
"federally owned lands"means land
interests held or retained by the United
States,but does not include those land
interests:(1)Tentatively approved,
legislatively conveyed,or patented to
the State of Alaska;or (2)interim
conveyed or patented to a Native
Corporation or person.
§13.3 Penalties.
Any person convicted of violating any
provision of the regulations contained in
this Part 13.or as the same may be
amended or supplemented,may be
punished by a fine not exceeding $500 or
by imprisonment not exceeding 6
months,or both,and may be adjudged
to pay all costs of the proceedings (16
U.S.C.3).
§13.4 Information collection.
The information collection
requirements contained in §§13.13.
13.14,13.15,13.16.13.17.13.31,13.44,
13.45,13.49,and 13.51 have been
approved by the Office of Management
and Budget under 44 U.S.C.3507 and
assigned clearance number 1024-0015.
The information is being collected to
solicit information necessary for the
Superintendent to issue permits and
other benefits,This information will be
used to grant statutory or administrative
benefits.In all sections except 13.13,the
obligation to respond is required to
obtain a benefit.In §13,13,the
obligation to respond is mandatory.
130
nsss Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday,June 17.1981 /Roles and Regulations
§13.10 SnewMMcMoas.
(a)The use of snowmadiines (during
periods of adequate snow cover or
frozen river conditions)for traditional
activities (where such activities are
permitted by ANILCA or other law)and
for travel to and from villages and
homesites,is permitted within park
areas,except where such use is
prohibited or otherwise restricted by the
Superintendent in accordance with the
provisions of S 13.30.Nothing in this
section affects the use of snowmobiles
by local rural residents engaged in
subsistence uses as authorized by
§13.46.
(b)For the purposes of this section
"adequate snow cover"shall mean
snow of sufficient depth to protect the
underlying vegetation and soil.
§13.11 Motorboats.
Motorboats may be operated on all
park area waters,except where such use
is prohibited or otherwise restricted by
the Superintendent in accordance with
the provisions of §13.30,or §7.23(b)-(f)
of this chapter.Nothing in this section
affects the use of motorboats by local
rural residents engaged in subsistence
uses as authorized by §13.46.
§13.12 fkMiiDotorizcd surface
transportatton.
The use of nonmotorized surface
transportation such as domestic dogs,
horses and other pack or saddle animals
is permitted in park areas except where
such use is prohibited or otherwise
restricted by the Superintendent in
accordance with the provisions of
§13.30.Nothing in this section affects
the use of nonmotorized surface
transportation by local rural residents
engaged in subsistence uses as
authorized by §13.46.
§13.13 Aircraft.
(a)Fixed-wing _i'-craft may be landed
and operated on lands and waters
within park areas,except where such
use is prohibited or otherwise restricted
by the Superintendent in accordance
with this section.The use of aircraft for
access to or from lands and waters
within a national park or monument for
purposes of taking fish and wildlife for
subsistence uses therein is prohibited as
set forth in §13.45.
(b)In imposing any prohibitions or
restrictions on fixed-wing aircraft use
the Superintendent shall:(1)Comply
with the procedures set forth in §13.30;
(2)publish notice of prohibitions or
restrictions as "Notices to Airmen"
issued by the Department of
Transportation;and (3)publish
permanent prohibitions or restrictions as
a regulatory notice in the United States
Government Flight Information Service
"Supplement Alaska."
(c)Except as provided in paragraph
(d)of this section,the ovroers of any
aircraft downed after December 2,1980,
shall remove the aircraft and all
component parts thereof in accordance
with procedures established by the
Superintendent In establishing a
removal procedure,the Superintendent
is authorized to:(1)Establish a
reasonable date by which aircraft
removal operations must be complete;
and (2)determine times and means of
access to and from the downed aircraft.
(d)The Superintendent may waive the
requirements of §13.12(c)upon a
determination that:(1)The removal of
downed aircraft would constitute an
unacceptable risk to human life;or (2)
the removal of a downed aircraft would
result in extensive resource damage;or
(3)the removal of a downed aircraft is
otherwise impracticable or impossible.
(e)Salvaging,removing,posessing,or
attempting to salvage,remove or
possess any downed aircraft or
component parts thereof is prohibited,
except in accordance with a removal
procedure established under paragraph
(c)of this section.Provided,however.
That the owner or an authorized
representative thereof may remove
valuable component parts from a
downed aircraft at the time of rescue
without a permit.
(f)The use of a helicopter in any park
area,other than at designated landing
areas [see Subpart C regulations for
each park area)pursuant to the terms
and conditions of a permit issued by the
Superintendent,is prohibited.
§13.14 Off-road vehicle*.
(a)The use of off-road vehicles in
locations other than established roads
and parking areas is prohibited,except
on routes or in areas designated by the
Superintendent or pursuant to a valid
permit as prescribed in paragraph (c)of
this section or in §13.15 or §13.16.Such
designations shall be made in
accordance wnth procedures in this
section.Nothing in this section affects
the use of off-road vehicles by local
rural residents engaged in subsistence
as authorized by §13.46.
(b)(1)The Superintendent's
determination of whether to designate a
route or area for off-road vehicle use
shall be governed by Executive Order
11644,as amended.
(2)Route or area designations shall be
published in the "Federal Register."
(3)Notice of routes or areas on which
off-road travel is permitted shall be in
accordance with the provisions of
§13.30(f).
(4)The closure or restricUoas on use
of designated routes or areas to off-road
vehicles use shall be in accordance with
the provisions of i 13.30.
(c)The Superintendent is authorized
to issue permits for the use of o^-road
vehicles on existing off-road vehicle
trails located in park areas (other than
areas designated as part of the National
Wilderness Prraervation System]upon a
finding that such o£f-road vehicle use
would be compatible with park purposes
and values.The Superintendent shall
include in any permit such stipulations
and conditions as are necessary for the
protection of park purposes and values.
§13.15 Access to inholdlngs.
(a)Purpose.A permit for access to
inholdings pursuant to this section is
required only where adequate and
feasible access is not affirmatively
provided without a permit under
§§13.10-13.14 of these regulations.
Thus,it is the purpose of this section to
ensure adequate and feasible access
across a park area for any person who
has a valid property or occupancy
interest in lands within or effectively
surrounded by a park area or other
lands listed in section 1110(b)of
ANILCA.
(b)Application and Administration.
(1)Applications for a permit designating
methods and routes of access across
park areas not affirmatively provided
for in this part shaU be submitted to the
Superintendent having jurisdiction over
the affected park area as specified
under §13.31.
(2)Except as provided in paragraph
(c)of this section,the access permit
application shall contain the name and
address of the applicant,documentation
of the relevant property or occupancy
interest held by the applicant (inducing
for 1872 Mining Law claimants a copy of
the location notice and recordations
required under the 1872 Mining Law and
43 U.S.C.1744),a map or physical
description of the relevant property or
occupancy mterest.a map or physical
description of the desired route of
access,a description of the desired
method of access,and any other
information necessary to determine the
adequacy and feasibility of the route or
method of access and its impact on the
natural or other values of the park area.
(3)The Superintendent shall specify in
a nontransferable permit,adequate and
feasible routes and methods of access
across park areas for any person who
meets the criteria of paragraph (a)of
this section.The Superintendent shall
designate the routes and methods
desired by the applicant unless it is
determined that:
131
Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday,June 17,1981 /Rules and Regulations 31857
(i)The route or method of access
would cause significant adverse impacts
on natural or other values of the park
area,and adequate and feasible access
otherwise exists;or
(u)The route or method of access
would jeopardize public health and
safety,and adequate and feasible
access otherwise exists.
(4)If the Superintendent makes one of
the findings described in paragraph
{b)(3)of this section,he/she shall
specify such other alternate methods
and routes of access as will provide the
applicant adequate and feasible access,
while minimizing damage to natural and
other values of the park area.
(5)Any person holding an access
permit shall notify the Superintendent of
any significant change in the method or
level of access from that occurring at the
time of permit issuance.In such cases,
the Superintendent may modify the
terms and conditions of the permit,
provided that the modified permit also
assures adequate and feasible access
under the standards of paragraph (b)(3)
of this section.
(6)Routes and methods of access
permitted pursuant to this section shall
be available for use by guests and
invitees of the permittee.
(c)Access requiring permanent
improvements.(1)Application form and
procedure.Any application for access to
an inholding which proposes the
construction or modification of an
improved road (e.g.,construction or
modification of a permanent,year-round
nature,and which involves substantial
alteration of the terrain or vegetation,
such as grading,gravelling of surfaces,
concrete bridges,or other such
construction or modification),or any
other permanent improvement on park
area lands qualifying as a
"transportation or utility system".under
Section 1102 of ANILCA,shall be
submitted on the consolidated
application form specified in Section
1104(h)of ANILCA,and processed in
accordance with the procedures of Title
XI of ANILCA.
(2)Decision-making standard,(i)If the
permanent improvement is required for
adequate and feasible access to the
inholding [e.g.,improved right-of-way or
landing strip),the permit granting
standards of paragraph (b)of this
section shall apply.
[ii)If the permanent improvement is
not required as part of the applicant's
right to adequate and feasible access to
an inholding [e.g.,pipeline,transmission
line),the permit granting standards of
Sections 1104-1107 of ANILCA shall
apply.
(d)Clarification of the Applicability
of 36 CFR Part 9.(1)1872 Mining Law
Claims and 36 CFR Subpart 9A.Since
section 1110(b)of ANILCA guarantees
adequate and feasible access to valid
mining claims within park areas
notwithstanding any other law,and
since the 36 CFR 9.3 requirement for an
approved plan of operations prior to the
issuance of an access permit may
interfere with needed access,36 CFR 9.3
is no longer applicable in Alaska park
areas.However,holders of patented or
unpatented mining claims under the 1872
Mining Law (30 U.S.C.22 et seq.)should
be aware that 36 CFR 9.9,9.10
independently require an approved plan
of operations prior to conducting mining
operations within a park area (except
that no plan of operations is required for
patented claims where access is not
across federally-owned parklands).
(2)Non-Federal Oil and Gas Rights
and 36 CFR Subpart 9B.Since section
1110(b)of ANILCA guarantees adequate
and feasible access to park area
inholdings notwithstanding any other
law,and since 36 CFR Subpart 9B was
predicated on the park area
Superintendent's discretion to restrict
and condition such access,36 CFR
Subpart 9B is no longer applicable in
Alaska park areas.
§13.16 Temporary access.
(a)Applicability.This section is
applicable to State and private
landowners who desire temporary
access across a park area for the
purposes of survey,geophysical,
exploratory and other temporary uses of
such nonfederal lands,and where such
temporary access is not affirmatively
provided for in §§13.10-13.15.State and
private landowners meeting the criteria
of §13.15(a)are directed to utilize the
procedures of §13.15 to obtain
temporary access.
(b)Application..\landowner
requiring temporary access across a
park area for survey,geophysical.
exploratory or similar temporary
activities shall apply to the
Superintendent for an access permit and
shall provide the relevant information
described in section 13.15(b)(2).
concerning the proposed access.
(c)Permit standards,stipulations and
conditions.The Superintendent shall
grant the desired temporary access
whenever he/she determines that such
access will not result in permanent harm
to park area resources.The
Superintendent shall include in any
permit granted such stipulations and
conditions on temporary access as are
necessary to ensure that the access
granted would not be inconsistent with
the purposes for which the park area
was reserved and to ensure that no
permanent harm will result to park area
resources.
(d)Definition.For the purposes of this
section,"temporary access"shall mean
limited,short-term [i.e.,up to on year
from issuance of the permit)access,
which does not require permanent
facilities for access,to undeveloped
State or private lands.
§13.17 Cabins and other structures.
(a)Purpose.It is the purpose of this
section to provide procedures and
guidance for those occupying and using
existing cabins and those wishing to
construct new cabins within park areas.
(b)E.xisting cabins or other structures.
(1)This subsection applies to all park
areas in Alaska except Klondike Gold
Rush National Historical Park,Sitka
National Historical Park and the former
Mt.McKinley National Park,Glacier
Bay National Monument and Katmai
National Monument.
(2)Cabins or other structures existing
prior to December 18,1973.may be
occupied and used by the claimants to
these structures pursuant to a
nontransferable,renewable permit.This
use and occupancy shall be for terms of
five years.Provided,however.That the
claimant to the structure,by application:
(i)Reasonably demonstrates by
affidavit,bill of sale or other
documentation proof of possessory
interest or right of occupancy in the
cabin or structure;
(ii)Submits an acceptable photograph
or sketch which accurately depicts the
cabin or structure and a map showing its
geographic location;
(iii)Agrees to vacate and remove all
personal property from the cabin or
structure upon expiration of the permit:
(iv).Acknowledges in the permit that
he/she has no interest in the real
property on which the cabin or structure
is located;and
(v)Submits a listing of the names of
all immediate family members residing
in the cabin or structure.
Permits issued under the provisions of
this paragraph shall be renewed every
five years until the death of the last
immediate family member of the
claimant residing in the cabin or
structure under permit.Renewal will
occur unless the Superintendent
determines after notice and hearing,and
on the basis of substantial evidence in
the administrative record as a whole,
that the use under the permit is causing
or may cause significant detriment to
the principal purposes for which the
park area was established.The
Superintendent's decision may be
appealed pursuant to the provisions of
43 CFR 4.700.
\
132
31858 Federal Re^ster /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday,June 17,1981 /Rules and Regulations
(3)Cabins or other structures,the
occupancy or use of which began
between Decemt>er 13.1973,and
December 1.1978,may be used and
occupied by the cJaimant to these
structures pursuant to a nontransferable,
nonrenewable permit.This use and
occupancy shall be for a maximum term
of 1 year:Provided,however,That the
claimant,by application,complies with
§13.17(c)(1)(i)through (iv)above.
Permits issued under the provisions of
this paragraph may be extended by the
Superintendent,subject to reasonable
regulations,for a period not to exceed
one year for such reasons as the
Superintendent deems equitable and
just.
(4)Cabins or other structures,
construction of which began after
December 1,1978,shall not be available
for use and occupancy,unless
authorized under the provisions of
paragraph (d)of this section.
(5)Cabins or other structures,not
under permit,shall be used only for
official government business:Provided,
however.That during emergencies
involving the safety of human life,or
where designated for public use by the
Superintendent through the posting of
signs,these cabins may be used by the
general public.
(c)New Cabins or Other Structures
Necessary for Subsistence Uses or
Otherwise Authorized by Law.The
Superintendent may issue a permit
under such conditions as he/she may
prescribe for the construction,
reconstruction,temporary use,
occupancy,and mamtenance of new
cabins or other structures when he/she
determines that the use is necessary to
accommodate reasonably subsistence
uses or is otherwise authorized by law.
In determining whether to permit the
use.occupancy,construction,
reconstruction or maintenance of cabins
or other structures,the Superintendent
shall be guided by factors such as other
public uses,pubhc health and safety,
environmental and resource protection,
research activities,protection of cultural
or scientific values,subsistence uses,
endangered or threatened species
conservation and other management
considerations necessary to ensure that
the activities authorized pursuant to this
section are compatible with the
purposes for which the park area was
established.
(d)Existing Cabin Leases or Permits.
Nothing in this section shall preclude
the renewal or continuation of valid
leases or permits in effect as of
December 2,1980,for cabina,homeailes,
or similar structures on federally owned
lands.Unless the SuperialendecLt issues
specific findings,following notice and
an opportunity for the leaseholder or
permittee to respond,that renewal or
continuation of such valid permit or
lease constitutes a direct threat or a
significant impairment to the purposes
for which the park area was established,
he/she shall renew such valid leases or
permits upon their expiration in
accordance with the provisions of the
original lease or permit subject to such
reasonable regulations as he/she
prescribe in keeping with the
management objectives of the pltIc area.
Subject to the provisions of the original
lease or permit,nothing in this
paragraph shall necessarily preclude the
Superintendent from transferring such a
lease or permit to another person at the
election or death of the original
permittse or leasee.
§13.18 Camping and picnicking.
(a)Camping.Camping is permitted in
park areas except where such use is
prohibited or otherwise restricted by the
Superintendent in accordance with the
provisions of §13.30,or as set forth for
specific park areas in Subpart C of this
part.
(b)Picnicking.Picnicking is permitted
in park areas except where such activity
is prohibited by the posting of
appropriate signs.
§13.19 Weapons,traps and nets.
(a)This section applies to all park
areas in Alaska except Klondike Gold
Rush National Historical Park,Sitka
National Historical Park and the former
Mt.McKinley National Park,Glacier
Bay National Monument and Katmai
National Monument.
(b)Firearms may be carried within
park areas in accordance with
applicable Federal and State laws,
except where such carrying is prohibited
or otherwise restricted pursuant to
§13.30.
(c)Traps,bows and other implements
authorized by State and Federal law for
the taking of fish and wildlife may be
carried within National Preserves only
during those times when the taking of
fish and wildlife is authonzed by
applicable law or regulation.
(d)In addition to the authorities
provided in paragraphs (b)and (c)of
this section,weapons (other than
firearms)traps and nets may be
possessed within park areas provided
such weapons,trapes or nets are within
or upon a device or animal used for
transportation and are unloaded and
cased or otherwise packed in such a
manner as to prevent their ready use
while in a par^area.
(e)Notwithstanding the provisions of
this section,local rural resideDts who
are authorized to engage in subsistence
uses,including the taking of wildlife
pursuant to §13.48,may use,possess,or
carry traps,nets and other weapons in
accordance with applicable State and
Federal laws.
§13.20 Preservation of natural features.
(a)This section applies to all park
areas in Alaska except Klondike Gold
Rush National Historical Park,Sitka
National Historical Park,the former Mt.
McKinley National Park,Glacier Bay
National Monument,and Katmai
.National Monument.
(b)Renewable Resources.The
gathering or collecting,by hand and for
personal use only,of the following
renewable resources is permitted:
(1)Natural plant food items,including
fruits,berries and mushrooms,but not
including threatened or endangered
species;
(2)Driftwood and uninhabited
seashells;
(3)Such plant materials and minerals
as are essential to the conduct of
traditional ceremonies by Native
Americans;and
(4)Dead or downed wood for use in
fires within park areas.
(c)Rocks and Minerals.Surface
collection,by hand (including hand-held
gold pans)and for personal recreational
use only,of rocks and minerals is
permitted:Provided,however.That (1)
collection of silver,platinum,gemstones
and fossils is prohibited,and (2)
collection methods which may result in
disturbance of the ground surface,such
as the use of shovels,pickaxes,sluice
boxes,and dredges,are prohibited.
(d)Closure and Notice.Under
conditions where it is found that
significant adverse impact on park
resources,wildlife populations,
subsistence uses,or visitor enjoyment of
resources will result,the Superintendent
shall prohibit the gathering or otherwise
restrict the coDecting of these items.
Portions of a park area in which
closures or restrictions apply shall be (1)
published in at least one newspaper of
general circulation in the State and
designated on a map which shall be
available for public inspection in the
office of the Superintendent,or (2)
designated by the posting of appropriate
signs,or (3)both.
(e)Subsistence.Nothing in this
section shall apply to local r\iral
residents authorized to take renewable
resources.
§13.21 Taking of ftoti and wUdOfe.
(a)Subsistence.Nothing in this
section shall apply to the taking of fish
and wildlife for subsistence uses.
133
Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday,June 17,1981 /Rules and Regulations 31859
(b)Fishing.Fishing is permitted in all
pari<areas in accordance with
applicable State and Federal law,and
such laws are hereby adopted and made
a part of these regulations to the extent
they are not inconsistent with §2.13 of
this chapter.With respect to the Cape
Krusenstern National Monument,the
Malaspina Glacier Forelands area of the
Wrangell-St.Elias National Preserve,
and the Dry Bay area of Glacier Bay
National Preserve,the exercise of valid
commercial fishing rights or privileges
obtained pursuant to existing law
—
including any use of park area lands for
campsites,cabins,motorized vehicles,
and aircraft landings on existing
airstrips which is directly incident to the
exercise of such rights or privileges
—
may continue:Provided,liowever.That
the Superintendent may restrict the use
of park area lands directly incident to
the exercise of these rights or privileges
if he/she determines,after conducting a
public hearing in the affected locality,
that such use of park area lands
constitutes a significant expansion of
the use of park area lands beyond the
level of such use during 1979.
(c)Hunting and Trapping.Hunting
and trapping are permitted in all
National Preserves in accordance with
applicable State and Federal law,and
such laws are hereby adopted and made
a part of these regulations:Provided,
however.That engaging in trapping
activities,as the employee of another
person is prohibited.
(d)Closures and Restrictions.The
Superintendent may prohibit or restrict
the taking of fish or wildlife in
accordance with the provisions of
§13.30.Except in emergency conditions.
such restrictions shall take effect only
after consultation with the appropriate
State agency having responsibility over
fishing,hunting,or trapping and
representatives of affected users.
§13.22 Unattended or abandoned
property.
(a)This section applies to all park
areas in Alaska except Klondike Gold
Rush National Historical Park and Sitka
National Historical Park,or as further
restricted for specific park areas in
Subpart C of this part.
(b)Leaving any snowmachine,vessel,
off-road vehicle or other personal
property unattended for longer than 12
months without prior permission of the
Superintendent is prohibited,and any
property so left may be impounded by
the Superintendent.
(c)The Superintendent may (1)
designate areas where personal property
may not be left unattended for any time
period.(2)establish limits on the
amount,and type of personal property
that may be left unattended.(3)
prescribe the manner in which personal
property may be left unattended,or (4)
establish limits on the length of time
personal property may be left
unattended.Such designations and
restrictions shall be (i)published in at
least one newspaper of general
circulation within the State,posted at
community post offices within the
vicinity affected,made available for
broadcast on local radio stations in a
manner reasonably calculated to inform
residents in the affected community,and
designated on a map which shall be
available for public inspection at the
office of the Superintendent,or (ii)
designated by the posting of appropriate
signs or (iii)both.
(d)In the event unattended property
interferes with the safe and orderly
management of a park area or is causing
damage to the resources of the area,it
may be impounded by the
Superintendent at any time.
§13.30 Closure procedures.
(a)Authonty.The Superintendent
may close an area or restrict an activity
on an emergency,temporary,or
permanent basis.
(b)Criteria.In determining whether to
close an area or restrict an activity on
an emergency basis,the Superintendent
shall be guided by factors such as public
health and safety,resource protection,
protection of cultural or scientific
values,subsistence uses,endangered or
threatened species conservation,and
other management considerations
necessary to ensure that the activity or
area is being managed in a manner
compatible with the purposes for which
the park area was established.
(c)Emergency Closures.(1)
Emergency closures or restrictions
relating to the use of aircraft,
snowmachines,motorboats,or
nonmotorized surface transportation
shall be made after notice and hearing:
(2)emergency closures or restrictions
relating to the taking of fish and wildlife
shall be accompanied by notice and
hearing;(3)other emergency closures
shall become effective upon notice as
prescribed in §13.30(f):and (4)no
emergency closure or restriction shall
extend for a period exceeding 30 days,
nor may it be extended.
(d)Temporary closures or
restrictions.(1)Temporary closures or
restrictions relating to the use of
aircraft,snowmachines,motorboats,or
nonmotorized surface transportation or
to the taking of fish and wildlife,shall
not be effective prior to notice and
hearing in the vicinity of the area(s)
directly affected by such closures or
restrictions,and other locations as
appropriate:(2)other temporary
closures shall be effective upon notice
as prescribed in §13.30(0:(3)temporary
closures or restrictions shall not extend
for a period exceeding 12 months and
may not be extended.
(e)Permanent closures or restrictions.
Permanent closures or restrictions shall
be published as rulemaking in the
Federal Register with a minimum public
comment period of 60 days and shall be
accompanied by public hearings in the
area affected and other locations as
appropriate.
(f)Notice.Emergency,temporary and
permanent closures or restrictions shall
be (1)published in at least one
newspaper of general circulation in the
State and in at least one local
newspaper if available,posted at
community post offices within the
vicinity affected,made available for
broadcast on local radio stations in a
manner reasonably calculated to inform
residents in the affected vicinity,and
designated on a map which shall be
available for public inspection at the
office of the Superintendent and other
places convenient to the public:or (2)
designated by the posting of appropriate
signs;or (3)both.
(g)Openings.In determining whether
to open an area to public use or activity
otherwise prohibited,the
Superintendent shall provide notice in
the Federal Register and shall,upon
request,hold a hearing in the affected
vicinity and other locations as
appropriate prior to making a final
determination.
(h)Except as otherwise specifically
permitted under the provisions of this
part,entry into closed areas or failure to
abide by restrictions established under
this section is prohibited.
§13.31 Permits.
(a)Application.(1)Application for a
permit required by any section of this
part shall be submitted to the
Superintendent having jurisdiction over
the affected park area,or in the absence
of the Superintendent,the Regional
Director.If the applicant is unable or
does not wish to submit the application
in written form,the Superintendent shall
provide the applicant an opportunity to
present the application orally and shall
keep a record of such oral application.
(2)The Superintendent shall grant or
deny the application in writing within 45
days.If this deadline cannot be met for
good cause,the Superintendent shall so
notify the applicant in writing.If the
permit application is denied,the
Superintendent shall specify in writing
the reasons for the denial.
134
31860 Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday,June 17,1981 /Rules and Regulations
(b)Denial and appeal procedures.(1)
An applicant whose application for a
permit,required pursuant to this part,
has been denied by the Superintendent
has the right to have the application
reconsidered by the Regional Director
by contacting him/her within 180 days
of the issuance of the denial.For
purposes of reconsideration,the permit
applicant shall present the following
information:
(i)Any statement or documentation,
in addition to that included in the initial
application,which demonstrates thai
the applicant satisfies the criteria set
forth in the section under which the
permit application is made.
(ii)The basis for the permit
applicant's disagreement with the
Superintendent's findings and
conclusions:and
(iii)Whether or not the permit
applicant requests an informal hearing
before the Regional Director.
(2)The Regional Director shall
provide a hearing if requested by the
applicant.After consideration of the
written materials and oral hearing,if
any.and within a reasonable period of
time,the Regional Director shall affirm,
reverse,or modify the denial of the
Superintendent and shall set forth in
writing the basis for the decision.A
copy of the decision shall be forwarded
promptly to the applicant and shall
constitute final agency action.
Subpart B—Subsistence
§13.40 Purpose and policy.
(a)Consistent with the management
of fish and wildlife in accordance with
recognized scientific principles and the
purposes for which each park area was
established,designated,or expanded by
ANILCA,the purpose of this subpart is
to provide the opportunity for local rural
residents engaged in a subsistence way
of life to do so pursuant to applicable
State and Federal law.
(b)Consistent with sound
management principles,and the
conservation of healthy populations of
fish and wildlife,the utilization of park
areas is to cause the least adverse
impact possible on local rural residents
who depend upon subsistence uses of
the resources of the public lands in
Alaska.
(c).Nonwasteful subsistence uses of
fish,wildlife and other renewable
resources by local rural residents shall
be the priority consumptive uses of such
resources over any other consumptive
uses permitted within park areas
pursuant to applicable State and Federal
law.
(d)Whenever it is necessary to
restrict the taking of a fish or wildlife
population within a park area for
subsistence uses in order to assure the
continued viability of such population or
to continue subsistence uses of such
population,the population shall be
allocated among local rural residents
engaged in subsistence uses in
accordance with a subsistence priority
system based on the following criteria:
(1)Customary and direct dependence
upon the resource as the mainstay of
one's livelihood;
(2)Local residency;and
(3)Availability of alternative
resources.
(e)The State of Alaska is authorized
to regulate the taking of fish and wildlife
for subsistence uses within park areas
to the extent such regulation is
consistent with applicable Federal law,
including but not limited to ANILCA.
(f)Nothing in this subpart shall be
construed as permitting a level of
subsistence use of fish and wildlife
within park areas to be inconsistent
with the conservation of healthy
populations,and within a national park
or monument to be inconsistent with the
conservation of natural and healthy
populations,of fish and wildlife.
§13.41 Applicability.
Subsistence uses by local rural
residents are allowed pursuant to the
regulations of this Subpart in the
following park areas:
(a)In national preserves;
(b)In Cape Krusenstern National
Monument and Kobuk Valley National
Park;
(c)Where such uses are traditional
(as may be further designated for each
park or monument in Subpart C of this
part)in Aniakchak National Monument.
Gates of the Arctic National Park.Lake
Clark National Park.Wrangell-St.Elias
National Park,and the Denali National
Park addition.
§13.42 Definitions.
(a)Local rural resident.(1)As used in
this part with respect to national parks
and monuments,the term "local rural
resident"shall mean either of the
following:
(i)Any person who has his/her
primary,permanent home within the
resident zone as defined by this section,
and whenever absent from this primary,
permanent home,has the intention of
returning to it.Factors demonstrating
the location of a person's primary,
permanent home may include,but are
not limited to,the permanent address
indicated on licenses issued by the State
of Alaska Department of Fish and
Game,driver's license,and tax returns,
and the location of registration to vote.
(ii)Any person authorized to engage
in subsistence uses in a national park or
monument by a subsistence permit
issued pursuant to §13.44.
(b)Resident zone.As used in this
part,the term "resident zone"shall
mean the area within,and the
communities and areas near,a national
park or monument in which persons
who have customarily and traditionally
engaged in subsistence uses within the
national park or monument permanently
reside.The communities and areas near
a national park or monument included
as a part of its resident zone shall be
determined pursuant to §13.43 and
listed for each national park or
monument in Subpart C of this part.
(c)Subsistence uses.As used in this
part,the term "subsistence uses"shall
mean the customary and traditional uses
by rural Alaska residents of wild,
renewable resources for direct personal
or family consumption as food,shelter,
fuel,clothing,tools or transportation;for
the making and selling of handicraft
articles out of nonedible byproducts of
fish and wildlife resources taken for
personal or family consumption;for
barter or sharing for personal or family
consumption;and for customary trade.
For the purposes of this paragraph,the
term
—
(1)"Family"shall mean all persons
related by blood,marriage,or adoption,
or any person living within the
household on a permanent basis:and
(2)"Barter"shall mean the exchange
of fish or wildlife or their parts taken for
subsistence uses
—
(i)For other fish or game or their
parts;or
(ii)For other food or for nonedible
items other than money if the exchange
is of a limited and noncommercial
nature;and
(3)"Customary t.ade"shall be limited
to the exchange of furs for cash (and
such other activities as may be
designated for a specific park area in
Subpart C of this part).
§13.43 Determination of resident zones.
(a)A resident zone shall include
—
(1)the area within a national park or
monument,and
(2)the communities and areas near a
national park or monument which
contain significant concentrations of
rural residents who,without using
aircraft as a means of access for
purposes of taking fish or wildlife for
subsistence uses (except in
extraordinary cases where no
reasonable alternative existed),have
customarily and traditionally engaged in
subsistence uses within a national park
or monument.For purposes of
135
Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday,[une 17.1981 /Rules and Regulations 31861
determining "significant"
concentrations,family members shall
also be included.
(b)After notice and comment,
including public hearing in the affected
local vicinity,a community or area near
a national park or monument may be
—
(1)Added to a resident zone,or
(2)Deleted from a resident zone.
when such community or area does or
does not meet the criteria set forth in
paragraph (a)of this section,as
appropriate.
(c)For purposes of this section,the
term "family"shall mean all persons
living within a rural resident's
household on a permanent basis.
§13.44 Subsistence permits for persons
whose primary,permanent home is outside
a resident zone.
(a)Any rural resident whose primary,
permanent home is outside the
boundaries of a resident zone of a
national park or monument may apply
to the appropriate Superintendent
pursuant to the procedures set forth in
§13.51 for a subsistence permit
authorizing the permit applicant to
engage in subsistence uses within the
national park or monument.The
Superintendent shall grant the permit if
the permit applicant demonstrates that.
(1)Without using aircraft as a means
of access for purposes of taking fish and
wildlife for subsistence uses,the
applicant has (or is a member of a
family which has)customarily and
traditionally engaged in subsistence
uses within a national park or
monument;or
(2)The applicant is a local rural
resident within a resident zone for
another national park or monument,or
meets the requirements of paragraph (1)
of this section for another national park
or monument,and there exists a pattern
of subsistence uses (without use of an
aircraft as a means of access for
purposes of taking fish and wildlife for
subsistence uses)between the national
park or monument previously utilized by
the permit applicant and the national
park or monument for which the permit
applicant seeks a subsistence permit.
(b)In order to provide for subsistence
uses pending application for and receipt
of a subsistence permit,until August 1,
1981,any rural resident whose primary
permanent home is outside the
boundaries of a resident zone of a
national park or monument and who
meets the criteria for a subsistence
permit set forth in paragraph (a)of this
section may engage in subsistence uses
in the national park or monument
w'!hout a permit in accordance with
ap;cable State and Federal law.
Effective August 1,1981.however,such
rural resident must have a subsistence
permit as required by paragraph (a)of
this section in order to engage in
subsistence uses in the national park or
monument.
(c)For purposes of this section,the
term "family"shall mean all persons
living within a rural resident's
household on a permanent basis.
§13.45 Prohibition of aircraft use.
(a)Motwithstanding the provisions of
§13.12 the use of aircraft for access to
or from lands and waters within a
national park or monument for purposes
of taking fish or wildlife for subsistence
uses within the national park or
monument is prohibited e.xcept as
provided in this section.
(b)Exceptions.(1)In extraordinary
cases where no reasonable alternative
exists,the Superintendent shall permit,
pursuant to specified terms and
conditions,a local rural resident of an
"exempted community"to use aircraft
for access to or from lands and water
within a national park or monument for
purposes of taking fish or wildlife for
subsistence uses.
(i)A community shall quality as an
"exempted community"if,because of
the location of the subsistence resources
upon which it depends and the
extraordinary difficulty of surface
access to these subsistence resources,
the local rural residents who
permanently reside in the community
have no reasonable alternative to
ai.'-craft use for access to these
subsistence resources.
(ii)A community which is determined,
after notice and comment (including
public hearing in the affected local
vicinity),to meet the description of an
"exempted community "set forth in
paragraph (b)(1)of this section shall be
included in the appropriate special
regulations for each park and monument
set forth in Subpart C of this part.
(iii)A community included as an
"exempted community"in Subpart C of
this part may be deleted therefrom upon
a determination,after notice and
comment (including public hearing in the
affected local vicinity),that it does not
meet the description of an "exempted
community"set forth in paragraph (b)(1)
of this section.
(2)Any local rural resident aggrieved
by the prohibition on aircraft use set
forth in this section may apply for an
exception to the prohibition pursuant to
the procedures set forth in §13.51.In
extraordinary cases where no
reasonable alternative exists,the
Superintendent may grant the exception
upon a determination that the location
of the subsistence resources depended
upon and the difficulty of surface access
to these resources,or other emergency
situation,requires such relief.
(c)Nothing in this section shall
prohibit the use of aircraft for access to
lands and waters within a national park
or monument for purposes of engagii^g in
any activity allowed by law other than
the taking of fish and wildlife.Such
activities include,but are not limited to.
transportating supplies.
§13.46 Use of snowmobiles,motorboats,
dog teams,and other means of surface
transportation traditionally employed by
local rural residents engaged in
subsistence uses.
(a)Notwithstanding any other
provision of this chapter,the use of
snowmobiles,motorboats.dog teams.
and other means of surface
transportation traditionally employed by
local rural residents engaged in
subsistence uses is permitted within
park areas except at those times and in
those areas restricted or closed by the
Superintendent.
(b)The Superintendent may restrict or
close a route or area to use of
snowmobiles,motorboats,dog teams,or
other means of surface transportation
traditionally employed by local rural
residents engaged in subsistence uses if
the Superintendent determines that such
use is causing or is likely to cause an
adverse impact on public health and
safety,resource protection,protection of
historic or scientific values,subsistence
uses,conservation of endangered or
threatened species,or the purposes for
which the park area was established.
(c)No restrictions or closures shall be
imposed without notice and a public
hearing in the affected vicinity and other
locations as appropriate.In the case of
emergency situations,restrictions or
closures shall not exceed sixty (60)days
and shall not be extended unless the
Superintendent establishes,after notice
and public hearing in the affected
vicinity and other locations as
appropriate,that such extension is
justified according to the factors set
forth in paragraph (b)of this section.
Notice of the proposed or emergency
restrictions or closures and the reasons
therefor shall be published in at least
one newspaper of general circulation
within the State and in at least one local
newspaper if appropriate,and
information about such proposed or
emergency actions shall also be made
available for broadcast on local radio
stations in a manner reasonably
calculated to inform local rural residents
in the affected vicinity.All restrictions
and closures shall be designated on a
map which shall be available for public
inspection at the office of the
IQC
31862 Federal Register /Vol.46,No.116 /Wednesday.June 17,1981 /Rules and Regulations
Superintendent of the affected park area
and the post office or postal authority of
every affected community within or near
the park area,or by the posting of signs
in the vicinity of the restrictions or
closures,or both.
(d)Motorboats,snowmobiles,dog
teams,and other means of surface
transportation traditionally employed by
local rural residents engaged in
subsistence uses shall be operated (1)in
compliance with applicable State and
Federal law,(2)in such a manner as to
prevent waste or damage to the park
areas,and (3)in such a manner as to
prevent the herding,harassment,hazing
or drivir;^of wildlife for hunting or other
purposes.
(e)At all times when not engaged in
subsistence uses,local rural residents
may use srwwmobiles,motorboats,dog
teams,and other means of surface
transportation in accordance with
§§13.10.13.11.13.12.and 13.14,
respectively.
§13.47 Subsistence fishing.
Fish may be taken by local rural
residents for subsistence uses in park
areas where subsistence uses are
allowed in compliance with applicable
State and Federal law.includiiig the
provisions of §§2.13 and 13.21 of this
chapter:Provided,however.That local
rural residents in park areas where
subsistence uses are allowed may fish
with a net.seine,trap,or spear where
permitted by State law.To the extent
consistent with the provisions of this
chapter,applicable State laws and
regulations governing the taking of fish
which are now or will hereafter be in
effect are hereby incorporated by
reference as a part of these regulations.
§13.48 Subsistence hunting and trapping
Local rural residents may hunt and
trap wildlife for subsistence uses in park
areas where subsistence uses are
allowed in compliance with applicable
State and Federal law.To the extent
consistent with the provisions of this
chapter,applicable State laws and
regulations governing the taking of
wildlife which are now or will hereafter
be in effect are hereby incorporated by
reference as a part of these regulations.
§13.49 Subsistence use Of timber and
plant material.
(a)Notwithstanding any other
provision of this part,the non-
commercial cutting of live standing
timber by local rural residents for
appropriate subsistence uses,such as
firewood or house logs,may be
permitted in park areas where
subsistence uses are allowed as follows:
(1)For live standing timber of
diameter greater than three inches at
ground height,the Superintendent may
permit catting in accordance with the
specifications of a permit if such cutting
is determined to be compatible with the
purposes for which the park area was
established;
(2]For live standing timber of
diameter less than three inches at
ground height,cutting is permitted
unless restricted by the Superintendent.
fb)The noncommerical gathering by
local rural residents of fruits,berries,
mushrooms,and other plant materials
for subsistence uses,and the
noncommerical gathering of dead or
downed timber for firewood,shall be
allowed without a permit in park areas
where subsistence uses are allowed.
(c)(1)Nothwithstanding any other
provision of this part,the
Superintendent,after notice and public
hearing in the affected vicinity and other
locations as appropriate,may
temporarily close all or any portion of a
park area to subsistence uses of a
particular plant population only if
necessary for reasons of public safety,
administration,or to assure the
continued viability of such population.
For the purposes of this section,the term
"temporarily"shall mean only so long
as reasonably necessary to achieve the
purposes of the closure.
(2)If the Superintendent determines
that an emergency situation exists and
that extraordinary measures must be
taken for public safety or to assure the
continued viability of a particular plant
population,the Superintendent may
immediately close all or any portion of a
park area to the subsistence uses of
such population.Such emergency
closure shall be effective when made,
shall be for a period not to exceed sixty
(60)days,and may not subsequently be
extended unless the Superintendent
establishes,after notice and public
hearing in the affected vicinity and other
locations as appropriate,that such
closure should be extended.
(3)Notice of administrative actions
taken pursuant to this section,and the
reasons justifying such actions,shall be
published in at least one newspaper of
general circulation within the State and
at least one local newspaper if
available,and information about such
actions and reasons also shall be made
available for broadcast on local radio
stations in a manner reasonably
calculated to inform local rural residents
in the affected vicinity.All closures
shall be designated on a map which
shall be available for public inspection
at the office of the Superintendent of the
affected park area and the post office or
postal authority of every affected
community within or near the park area,
or by the posting of signs in the vicinity
of the restrictions,or both.
§13.50 Ctosure to subsistence uses of
fish and witdllfe.
(a)Notwithstanding any other
provision of this part,the
Superintendent,after consultation with
the State and adequate notice and
public hearing in the affected vicinity
and other locations as appropriate,may
temporarily close all or any portion of a
park area to subsistence uses of a
particular fish or wildlife population
only if necessary for reasons of public
safety,administration,or to assure the
continued viability of such population.
For purposes of this section,the term
"temporarily"shall mean only so long
as reasonably necessary to achieve the
purposes of the closure.
(b)If the Superintendent determines
that an emergency situation exists and
that extraordinary measures must be
taken for public safety or to assure the
continued viability of a particular fish or
wildlife population,the Superintendent
may immediately close all or any
portion of a park area to the subsistence
uses of such population.Such
emergency closure shall be effective
when made,shall be for a period not to
exceed sixty (60)days,and may not
subsequently be extended unless the
Superintendent establishes,after notice
and public hearing in the affected
vicinity and other locations as
appropriate,that such closure should be
extended.
(c)Notice of administrative actions
taken pursuant to this section,and the
reasons justifying such actions,shall be
published in at least one newspaper of
general circulation within the State and
in at least one local newspaper if
available,and information about such
actions and reasons also shall be made
available for broadcast on local radio
stations in a manner reasonably
calculated to inform local rural residents
in the affected vicinity.All closures
shall be designated on a map which
shall be available for public inspection
at the office of the Superintendent of the
affected park area and the post office or
postal authority of every affected
community within or near the park area,
or by the posting of signs in the vicinity
of the restrictions,or both.
§13.51 Application procedures for
subsistence penntts and aircraft
exceptions.
(a)Any person applying for the
subsistence permit required by
§13.44(a),or the exception to the
prohibition on aircraft use provided by
137
Federal Register /Vol.46.No.116 /Wednesday,June 17.1981 /Rules and Regulations 31863
§13.45(b)(2).shall submit his/her
application to the Superintendent of the
appropriate national park or monument.
If the applicant is unable or does not
wish to submit the application in written
form,the Superintendent shall provide
the applicant an opportunity to present
the application orally and shall keep a
record of such oral application.Each
application must include (1)a statement
which acknowledges that providing
false information in support of the
application is a violation of Section 1001
of Title 18 of the United States Code,
and (2)additional statements or
documentation which demonstrates that
the applicant satisfies the criteria set
forth in §13.44(a)for a subsistence
permit or §13.45(b)(2)for the aircraft
exception,as appropriate.Except in
extraordinary cases for good cause
shown,the Superintendent shall decide
whether to grant or deny the application
in a timely manner not to exceed forty-
five (45)days following the receipt of
the completed application.Should the
Superintendent deny the application,
he/she shall include in the decision a
statement of the reasons for the denial
and shall promptly forward a copy to
the applicant.
(b)An applicant whose application
has been denied by the Superintendent
has the right to have his/her application
reconsidered by the Alaska Regional
Director by contacting the Regional
Director within 180 days of the issuance
of the denial.The Regional Director may
extend the 180-day time limit to initiate
a reconsideration for good cause shown
by the applicant.For purposes of
reconsideration,the applicant shall
present the following information:
(1)Any statement or documentation,
in addition to that included in the initial
application,which demonstrates that
the applicant satisfies the criteria set
forth in paragraph (a)of this section:
(2)The basis for the applicant's
disagreement with the Superintendent's
findings«flnd conclusions;and
(3)Whether or aot the applicant
requests an infonnal hearing before the
Regional Director.
(c)The Regional Director shall
provide a hearing if requested by the
applicant.After consideration of the
written materials and oral hearing,if
any.and within a reasonable period of
time,the Regional Director shall affirm,
reverse,or modify the denial of the
Superintendent and shall set forth in
writing the basis for the decision.A
copy of the decision shall be forwarded
promptly to the applicant and shall
constitute final agency action.
Subpart C—Special Regulations-
Specific Park Areas in Alaska
§13.63 Denali National Park and Pre-
serve.
(a)Subsistence—(1)Resident Zone.
The following communities and areas
are included within the resident zone
for Denali National Park addition:
Cantwell
Mlnchumina
Nikolai
Tellda
(b)Camping.Camping Is prohibited
along the i 'ad corridor and at Wonder
Lake,except at designated areas.
Camping is allowed in other areas In
accordance with the backcountry man-
agement plan.
(c)Unattended or Abandoned Prop-
erty.Leaving unattended and aban-
doned property along the road corri-
dor,at Wonder Lake,and in the areas
included in the backcountry manage-
ment plan,is prohibited.
(d)[Reserved]
(e)Fishing limit of catch and in pos-
session.The limit of catch per person
per day shall be 10 fish but not to
exceed 10 pounds and one fish,except
that the limit of catch of lake trout
(macklnaw)per person per day shall
be two fish including those hooked
and released.Possession of more than
one day's limit of catch by one person
at any one time is prohibited.
(f)Mountain Climbing.Registration
is required in advance on a form pro-
vided by the Superintendent for climb-
ing Mount McKinley and Mount For-
aker.
[46 FR 31854,June 17.1981,and 45 FR
78120,Nov.25,1980,as amended at 48 FR
30295.June 30,1983]
APPENDIX C:MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
Resource Protection
Identify and evaluate all natural and cultural resources within the
park and preserve,including wildlife,flora and historical,cultural,
and geological resources,so that management has adequate
information and data upon which to base decisions for their
protection and preservation.
Identify threats and potential threats to all natural and cultural
resources and analyze these threats and develop means to mitigate or
resolve them so as to reduce or possibly eliminate adverse human
effects on park and preserve resources.
Collect data on current conditions and uses of natural and cultural
resources to serve as a basis for preparing and implementing both a
resource management plan and a general management plan.
In accordance with the provisions of the Wilderness Act (1964)and
the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (1980),and
based upon a reevaluation of the management objectives that have
evolved since the establishment of Mount McKinley National Park in
1917,develop and implement plans to protect and preserve
designated wilderness areas.
Elicit the cooperation of knowledgeable individuals,groups,
institutions,and agencies to collect the most current and complete
information and data about cultural and natural resources.
Work cooperatively with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in
regulating consumptive uses of natural resources to preserve habitat
and maintain healthy populations of wildlife.
To the fullest extent possible make management decisions that will
allow natural forces to shape the substances of the park and
preserve environment.
Seek the cooperation of mining interests for the purpose of
maintaining high environmental standards and protecting and
preserving natural and cultural resources.
Prepare and implement programs to encourage subsistence users of
the park and preserve and sport hunters of the preserve to
understand and respect the natural forces at work and to avoid
actions that might disrupt natural balances.
Locate and identify all historic and prehistoric sites and structures
for possible designation on the National Register of Historic Places
and on the Alaska Heritage Resources Survey.
Assemble natural and cultural resource information and data to be
used in interpretive materials and programs for the purpose of
enhancing the enjoyment and education of visitors.
139
Prepare and implement plans to protect and preserve essential
wildlife habitats and populations.
Conduct studies about fire in the area--both natural and
otherwise--for the purpose of collecting information and data as a
basis for updating the current interagency management plan and
implementing the new version.
Information and Interpretation
Provide visitors with services,materials,and programs for the
purpose of enhancing their knowledge of park and preserve
resources and their opportunities for enjoyable,safe,and
educational visits.
For the purpose of minimizing conflicts among various users of park
and preserve resources,prepare and present informative materials
about the differences between land use management categories and
regulations for Alaskan park units and those of parks in other
states.
Devise information and interpretive programs to afford visitors with
opportunities to present their views to management in order that the
programs might become more meaningful.
Provide information and programs for local communities so that
citizens might be kept informed about the operations of the park and
preserve.
Upgrade and maintain study collections of natural and cultural
objects,the park library,and slide and photographic files to have
adequate sources for interpreting Denali's cultural and natural
history.
Administration
Provide adequate staff so that resources can be protected and
preserved,visitors can be served effectively,cultural and natural
resources information and data can be updated and kept current,
and interpretive materials and programs can be made more
meaningful
.
Employ innovative management approaches in staffing plans and
training and development programs that recognize the knowledge and
skills of local persons and severe environmental working conditions
so that there is a continuing effective staff to protect and preserve
resources and to provide visitor services.
Work toward the implementation of the various sections of ANILCA
including the formation of subsistence councils,mandatory studies
and plans,and access routes,to comply with the legislation as soon
as possible.
140
Visitor Use and Safety
Provide all visitors and potential visitors with information to enhance
their opportunities for enjoyable,meaningful,and safe park
experiences.
Provide recreational facilities,efficient public transportation and
other visitor services which enable visitors to use and enjoy park
resources in the safest and freest possible manner compatible with
protection of park resources.
Specifically manage visitor use in the interest of public safety with
respect to potential dangers associated with grizzly and black bear
encounters and activities in subarctic wilderness conditions such as
mountain climbing,hiking,camping,snowmobiling,and cross-country
skiing .
Determine what feasible methods park management can employ for the
purpose of better accommodating handicapped visitors.
Visitor Protection and Safety
Have well-trained,well-equipped field personnel for the purpose of
operating effectively in emergencies in matters of search and rescue
and law enforcement.
Provide information and programs to the public about the hazards in
the park and preserve so that visitors are prepared to take the
necessary precautions to avoid them.
Monitor mountaineering activities and conduct studies for the purpose
of collecting information and data as a basis for a mountaineering
management plan that will address such particulars as the injury and
fatality rates;the logistics,costs,and coordination of search and
rescue missions;the litter and human waste left by climbers;and
the qualifications of persons on climbs and expeditions.
Concessions
Identify appropriate levels and types of commercial services and
issue concessions contracts,permits,and commercial licenses as
appropriate to those commercial operators best able to meet the needs
of visitors and protect resources.
Cooperation
Work cooperatively with various local,state,and federal agencies
that have mutual concerns about and interests in the park and
preserve area,and when necessary develop memoranda of agreement,
so that ideas and information can be shared and conflicts minimized.
Work especially close to the Division of State Parks in matters
relative to uses and developments in Denali State Park and in the
national park and preserve so that the state park and the national
141
park and preserve complement each other both in protecting and
preserving resources and in providing services to visitors.
Share information with and provide technical assistance to private
interests and local and regional governments in matters of community
and regional planning so that the purposes of the park and preserve
receive due consideration in community and regional plans.
142
APPENDIX D:PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES
The preliminary cost estimates cover only development proposals for the
north-side park road corridor.The proposal for the south side of Denali
remains too conceptual to estimate the costs of implementation.Further
studies for the south side will be undertaken cooperatively with the state
of Alaska,and they will provide the necessary level of detail.It is
hoped that significant portions of any south-side development will be
accomplished by private enterprise.
The following estimated construction costs include construction
supervision,cultural resource compliance,and contingencies.
Alternative B:The Proposal
Riley Creek/Hotel Area
Hotel $14,000,000
Interpretive center,roads,parking $3,700,000
Hostel,shower,store,gas station,parking 3,081,000
Landscaping/general site improvements at hotel and
depot 291,000
Depot expansion 225,000
Park Road
Comprehensive sign program,mileposts 66,000
Place power lines and transformers underground 131,000
Four waysides 1,048,000
Eielson Visitor Center
Interim renovation and grounds improvements 1,048,000
*Option 1 -Expansion of existing building 2,620,000
*Option 2 -Replacement of existing building 5,240,000
Campground Improvements (excluding Riley Creek)
Restore Sanctuary,Teklanika,and Igloo 346,000
Relocate Wonder Lake campground;obliterate and
restore old campground 655,000
Wonder Lake trail system (assumes contract
construction)721,000
Park Headquarters/C-Camp
Public comfort station,road and parking improvements 504,000
Administration building annex 1,769,000
Employee housing including garage,recreation court,
and relocation of existing management structures--
total of 13 housing units 3,668,000
Seasonal housing including 5 duplexes,6 cabins,
shower/toilet building,and general site
improvements 3,316,000
*Only one option will be selected.The total range of costs shows both
options.
143
Transient bunkhouse 384,000
Access roads,trailer pads with utilities,paving of
main road and maintenance area 452,000
Toklat
Ranger station renovation and storage building 210,000
Seasonal employee housing--6 units 214,000
Trailer pads (8)with utilities 211,000
Transient bunkhouse 286,000
Maintenance facilities 1,146,000
Wonder Lake Ranger Station
Rehabilitate existing ranger station 131,000
Seasonal employee cabins (4 units)491,000
Central shower/laundry/toilet/fire and rescue cache
building (this may not be needed if existing
facilities in basement of ranger station can be
retained)262,000
Utility building,fuel pumps,and storage (at maintenance
area)550,000
Parkwide Radio System 413,000
Total $41,939,000 to $44,559,000
Alternative A
The full range of actions included in the 1983 Development Concept Plan
for the park road corridor would be undertaken in this alternative.
Unlike the proposal,the unknown costs associated with any south-side
proposal would not be underwritten by the National Park Service in this
alternative.
Riley Creek/Hotel Area
Interpretive center,roads,parking $8,515,000
Campground,roads,trails,site development,
structures 2,164,000
Hostel,shower,store,gas station,parking 3,081,000
Concession improvements--employee housing &dining,
bus maintenance building,coffee shop,AV room,etc.2,751,000
Landscaping/general site improvements at hotel and
depot 291,000
Depot expansion 225,000
Park Road
Comprehensive sign program,mileposts 66,000
Place power lines and transformers underground 131,000
Develop 7 waysides 2,120,000
Eielson Visitor Center
Interim renovation and grounds improvements 1,048,000
*Option 1 -Expansion of existing building 2,620,000
*Option 2 -Replacement of existing building 5,240,000
144
Campground Improvements (excluding Riley Creek)
General rehabilitation of sites and minimal
improvements (cooking shelters,etc.)178,000
Expansion/renovation of Teklanika campground
including roads,caretaker duplex,comfort
stations,sewage system 1,975,000
Relocate Wonder Lake campground;obliterate and
restore old campground 2,710,000
Wonder Lake trail system (assumes contract
construction)721,000
Park Headquarters/C-Camp
Public comfort station,road and parking improvements 504,000
Administration building annex 1,769,000
Employee housing including garage,recreation court,
and relocation of existing management structures--
total of 13 housing units 3,668,000
Seasonal housing including 5 duplexes,6 cabins,
shower/toilet building,and general site
improvements 3,316,000
Transient bunkhouse 384,000
Access roads,trailer pads with utilities,paving of
main road and maintenance area 452,000
Toklat
Ranger station renovation and storage building 210,000
Seasonal employee housing--6 units 214,000
Trailer pads (8)with utilities 211,000
Transient bunkhouse 286,000
Maintenance facilities 1,146,000
Wonder Lake Ranger Station
Rehabilitate existing ranger station 131,000
Seasonal employee cabins (4 units)491,000
Central shower/laundry/toilet/fire and rescue cache
building (this may not be needed if existing
facilities in basement of ranger station can be
retained)262,000
Transient bunkhouse ^286,000
Utility building,fuel pumps,and storage (at maintenance
area)550,000
Parkwide Radio System 413,000
Total $42,889,000 to $45,509,000
145
[copy]
APPENDIX E;
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,
AND
THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND
PUBLIC FACILITIES
ARTICLE I.BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
The objective of this memorandum of understanding is to establish an
agreement between the signatories regarding processes for cooperative
planning and development of visitor services and facilities in the region
south of the Mount McKinley massif.It is the intent of the signatories to
continue to work cooperatively during the design,development,and
operational stages.Following public comment on alternative systems of
recreation services and facilities as set forth in the initial planning
document,the signatories intend to come to a mutual decision on one of
the alternatives and,through an addendum to this agreement,to set
forth their respective roles in designing and developing this alternative.
It is recognized that a previous memorandum of understanding dated
September 27,1978,between the state of Alaska,the U.S.Department of
the Interior,and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough set forth a similar intent
to cooperate in providing visitor facilities in the south Denali area.The
basic intent of that memorandum of understanding is still valid;however,
this memorandum modifies the previous agreement in that (1)means of
access in addition to the Petersville Road and locations other than the
Peters Hills area will also be considered and (2)more extensive
involvement of private enterprise is anticipated.
WHEREAS,the Mount McKinley massif and surrounding public lands
constitute a valuable public resource,and
WHEREAS,improving the public's opportunity to view and experience this
resource will benefit the citizens of Alaska and visitors to the state and
will help carry out the purpose of Denali National Park and Preserve and
Denali State Park,and
WHEREAS,access,interpretive services,recreation facilities and
accommodations for the visitor to Denali National Park and Preserve are
concentrated north of the Alaska Range,and
WHEREAS,the extension of a system of access,services,facilities and
visitor accommodations to the region south of the range will (1)better
distribute human impact on the natural resources of the region,(2)
shorten travel distance from Anchorage and therefore reduce costs of
reaching the resource for many people,and (3)enable public enjoyment
of a different and equally spectacular aspect of the Mount McKinley massif
and its surrounding geologic features and natural resources,and
146
[copy]
WHEREAS,public lands immediately south of the Alaska Range are under
the management of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources,Division
of Parks and Outdoor Recreation,and the Department of the Interior,
National Park Service,and
WHEREAS,the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
has the primary responsibility for planning and developing means of
access in the state,and
WHEREAS,the Alaska Department of Natural Resources is responsible for
determining the future use of state park lands and is interested in
coordinating its planning processes with the National Park Service,and
WHEREAS,the National Park Service is preparing a general management
plan for submission to Congress by December 2,1985,and
WHEREAS,the Park,Parkway and Recreation Area Study Act of May 23,
1936,charges the Secretary of the Interior with responsibility "to promote
the coordination and development of effective programs relating to outdoor
recreation.
"
ARTICLE II.STATEMENT OF WORK
NOW,THEREFORE,
1
.
The signatories to this memorandum of understanding agree to
cooperate in defining and describing at least three alternative
systems of access,interpretive services,recreational facilities
and visitor accommodations for the region immediately south of
the Alaska Range.These alternative systems will be designed
to provide a variety of opportunities year around for enjoyment
of the lands and resources of the area,including opportunities
to view the Mount McKinley massif and surrounding mountain
scenery,opportunities for close contact with glaciers,and
opportunities for hiking,skiing,camping,wildlife viewing,and
for the use and enjoyment of lakes and waterways in the
region.Appropriate points of interpretation of natural features
and resources will be included within this system.
These descriptions shall suggest state,federal,and private
roles in developing and operating the alternative systems and
include preliminary budget estimates for publicly funded
components.Consideration will be given to the role of private
enterprise both inside and outside the park boundaries.
Participation by private parties will be proposed for those
elements for which private enterprise is the most effective
means of accomplishment.
2.The signatories agree to divide the task of defining and
describing alternate systems as follows:
147
[copy]
a.The National Park Service,in consultation with other
participants,shall prepare a draft description and map
depicting the alternative systems.The National Park
Service planner assigned to this project shall work closely
with the other two participants,spending time as
necessary within their offices.
b.The Department of Natural Resources,Division of Parks
and Outdoor Recreation,shall provide information on land
ownership as needed to define and evaluate the alternative
systems.
c.The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities shall provide a preliminary analysis of cost and
feasibility of various means of access as needed to define
the alternative systems (cost not to exceed $10,000).
d.Wherever feasible the signatories shall share facilities,
equipment,field opportunities,information,and staff in
accomplishing this agreement.
e.Each signatory shall designate a planner to provide review
and advice to the National Park Service in describing and
defining alternatives.In addition,the following agencies
shall be requested to designate representatives to provide
review and advice in the definition and drafting of
alternative systems:Matanuska-Susitna Borough,Alaska
Department of Commerce and Economic Development,Alaska
Federation of Natives,Alaska Visitors Association,and the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game.The National Park
Service shall be responsible for calling and chairing
meetings,circulating materials for review,and otherwise
initiating contact as necessary to obtain information,
advice,and review from the other signatories and the
advisory agencies.
f.The National Park Service,in consultation with
representatives of the other two agencies,shall prepare a
draft public participation program for this project,noting
the time and place of all public meetings and the comment
period on any documents issued to the public.This
program shall be subject to the approval of each of the
signatories of this agreement.The participation of both
state and federal parties in this project shall be equally
recognized at all public meetings and on any documents
issued to the public.
It is the intent of the signatories to obtain public review and
comment on concepts for alternative systems as part of the
process of public review for the general management plan for
the Denali National Park and Preserve during the fall of 1984.
Prior to public review the concepts involving state land shall be
subject to approval of the state.
148
[copy]
4.Following concept review,the draft of alternative systems shall
be detailed and completed,printed in a separate document and
released for public review and comment.The three signatories
shall approve this document for purposes of public review and
comment before it is released.It is anticipated that this phase
of the project shall be completed by fall 1985.
5.To test the marketability and economic feasibility of the
alternatives,the signatories may request expressions of interest
from the private sector.
6.After public comment has been received and analyzed,the
signatories will attempt to come to a mutual choice for one of
the alternatives and through an addendum to this agreement,to
set forth their respective roles in designing and developing this
alternative.It is intended that these decisions will be made by
spring 1986.It is recognized that the state has final approval
authority over state lands and the National Park Service has
final approval authority over National Park Service lands.
ARTICLE III.TERM AND TERMINATION
This agreement shall be effective for five years from the date of the last
signature.It is the intent of the signatories to develop addenda to this
agreement specifying their joint approval of one of the alternative systems
of access,interpretive services,recreation facilities,and visitor
accommodations,and outlining their participation in the design,
development,and operation of the selected system.At the end of five
years this agreement shall be reviewed to determine whether it should be
renewed,modified,or terminated.
Any signator to this agreement may terminate the agreement by providing
60 days'written notice to the others.
ARTICLE IV.REQUIRED CLAUSES
During the performance of this agreement,the participants agree to abide
by the terms of Executive Order 11246 on nondiscrimination and will not
discriminate against any person because of race,color,religion,sex,or
national origin.The participants will take affirmative action to ensure
that applicants are employed without regard to their race,color,religion,
sex,or national origin.
No member or delegate to Congress,or resident commissioner,shall be
admitted to any share or part of this agreement,or to any benefit that
may arise therefrom,but this provision shall not be construed to extend
to this agreement if made with a corporation for its general benefit.
149
state of Alaska
Department of Natural Resources
Title
Date Jg^^/^f >^
Department of the Interior
National Park Service
tie ^^^^^g^tL^.ZJ-gd.^^fe'
Date /^^<^.^A>^
State of Alaska
Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities
iU^cQ
Title ^Cpjrp^^^^A1 ^'S'-t <"g^Cv^
Date ^\J^^-J^l^&^-
150
APPENDIX F
SUBSISTENCE EVALUATION
(Compliance with Section 810 of ANILCA)
I.INTRODUCTION
Section 810(a)of ANILCA states:
In determining whether to withdraw,reserve,lease,or
otherwise permit the use,occupancy,or disposition of public
lands under any provision of law authorizing such actions,the
head of the Federal agency having primary jurisdiction over
such lands or his designee shall evaluate the effect of such
use,occupancy,or disposition on subsistence uses and needs,
the availability of other lands for the purposes sought to be
achieved,and other alternatives which would reduce or
eliminate the use,occupancy,or disposition of public lands
needed for subsistence purposes.No such withdrawal,
reservation,lease,permit,or other use,occupancy or
disposition of such lands which would significantly restrict
subsistence uses shall be effected until the head of such
Federal agency -
(i)gives notice to the appropriate State agency and the
appropriate local committees and regional councils
established pursuant to section 805;
(2)gives notice of,and holds,a hearing in the vicinity of
the area involved;and
(3)determines that (A)such a significant restriction of
subsistence uses is necessary,consistent with sound
management principles for the utilization of the public
lands,(B)the proposed activity will involve the minimal
amount of public lands necessary to accomplish the
purposes of such use,occupancy,or other disposition,
and (C)reasonable steps will be taken to minimize adverse
impacts upon subsistence uses and resources resulting
from such actions.
II.EVALUATION CRITERIA
The following criteria were used to determine adverse effects on
subsistence:
large reductions in the abundance of harvestable resources because
of adverse impacts on habitat or increased competition from sport
harvests
major redistributions of resources because of alteration of habitat or
migration routes
151
substantial interference with harvester access to active subsistence
sites through physical or legal barriers
III.PROPOSED ACTION ON FEDERAL LANDS
The National Park Service proposes to implement a general management
plan,land protection plan,and wilderness suitability review for Denali
National Park and Preserve.The general management plan will guide
resource management,visitor use,and development for a ten-year period.
The land protection plan will guide management activities related to
private lands for a period of two years.The wilderness suitability
review evaluates lands in Denali for their suitability or nonsuitability for
inclusion in the national wilderness preservation system;it will be valid
until such time as a formal recommendation is transmitted to Congress.
IV.ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A.General Management Plan
Continue present management (alternative A)
Develop a visitor service and activity center on the south side,
accompanied by a reduction in overnight use on the north side
(alternative B,selected as the proposed general management plan)
Perpetuate existing levels of mineral development in the Kantishna
Hills and Dunkle Mine areas (alternatives A and B)
B.Land Protection Plan
Acquire surface estates in the Kantishna Hills
Acquire fee title to mining properties in the Kantishna Hills wherever
an adverse threat to park resources is recognized
Acquire the wolf townships
Adjust the boundary along the Swift Fork and Tokositna rivers
V.AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
ANILCA authorizes subsistence harvests within the new park additions
and the preserve.Subsistence use is not considered extensive.
Resident zones established for Denali include the communities of Cantwell,
Minchumina,Nikolai,and Telida.In addition,16 subsistence use permits
are held by individuals who are not residents of those four communities.
The principal subsistence activities are hunting for caribou and moose and
trapping for marten and lynx.
152
VI.EVALUATION
A.The Potential to Reduce Populations,Redistribute Resources,or
Interfere with Access
No action of the general management plan or the land protection plan
will significantly reduce populations through impacts on habitat or
increased competition from nonsubsistence harvest.Implementation
of the proposed resource management strategy will result in better
understanding of the natural processes at Denali and in corrective
actions being taken where necessary to eliminate threats to wildlife
populations.The proposal for visitor use and general development
also attempts to reduce impacts on wildlife by limiting vehicle use on
the north side of the park complex.Mining operations in the
Kantishna Hills,if continued at existing levels,will damage riparian
habitat and cause minor reductions in the populations of species
dependent on that habitat,principally moose,marten,and fox.
None of the reductions in population would be expected to be
significant.The land protection plan supports the objective of
reducing traffic on the north side of Denali by recommending the
acquisition of the surface estates on patented mining properties to
reduce the potential for recreational development within the interior
of the park.The land protection plan also seeks the inclusion of
the wolf townships within the park to protect the wildlife populations
using those lands from sport hunting.
No action of the general management plan or the land protection plan
will adversely affect the distribution or migration patterns of
subsistence resources.Therefore,no change in the availability of
subsistence resources is anticipated as a result of the implementation
of either plan.
All rights of access for subsistence harvests granted by section 811
of ANILCA will be maintained by the general management plan and
the land protection plan.Regulations implementing section 811 of
ANILCA are currently in place,and the two plans do not suggest
changing those regulations.
B.Availability of Other Lands forHhe Proposed Action
Established in 1917 and significantly enlarged in 1980,Denali
National Park and Preserve was included as a unit of the national
park system because of the wealth of outstanding natural resources
and dramatic features.No other lands would be suitable for the
specific purpose of preserving those resources and providing for
their enjoyment by the public.The only other major land use
addressed by the plans is mineral development,which will occur on
patented or valid unpatented claims.The proposed plans are
consistent with the mandates of ANILCA,including title VIM,and
with the National Park Service Organic Act.
C.Alternatives
The alternatives considered during this project were limited to the
park complex and lands immediately adjacent to the park and
153
preserve.None of the alternatives,including the proposal,would
have a significant effect on subsistence use.
VII.CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
See the consultation and coordination section of this document for
information.
VIM.Based on the above process and considering all available
information,this evaluation concludes that the proposed actions will not
result in a significant restriction in subsistence use in Denali National
Park and Preserve.
154
APPENDIX G
(copy)
MASTER MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
JUNEAU,ALASKA
AND
THE U.S.NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
ANCHORAGE,ALASKA
This Master Memorandum of Understanding between the State of Alaska,
Department of Fish and Game,hereinafter referred to as the Department,
and the U.S.Department of the Interior,National Park Service,
hereinafter referred to as the Service,reflects the general policy
guidelines within which the two agencies agree to operate.
WHEREAS,the Department,under the Constitution,laws,and regulations
of the State of Alaska,is responsible for the management,protection,
maintenance,enhancement,rehabilitation,and extension of the fish and
wildlife resources of the State on the sustained yield principle,subject to
preferences among beneficial uses;and
WHEREAS,the Service,by authority of the Constitution,laws of
Congress,executive orders,and regulations of the U.S.Department of
the Interior is responsible for the management of Service lands in Alaska
and the conservation of resources on these lands,including conservation
of healthy populations of fish and wildlife within National Preserves and
natural and healthy populations within National Parks and Monuments;and
WHEREAS,the Department and the Service share a mutual concern for
fish and wildlife resources and their habitats and desire to develop and
maintain a cooperative relationship which will be in the best interests of
both parties,the fish and wildlife resources and their habitats,and
produce the greatest public benefit;and
WHEREAS,the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA)
and subsequent implementing Federal regulations recognize that the
resources and uses of Service lands in Alaska are substantially different
than those of similar lands in other states and mandate continued
subsistence uses in designated National Parks plus sport hunting and
fishing,subsistence,and trapping uses in National Preserves under
applicable State and Federal laws and regulations;and
WHEREAS,the Department and the Service recognize the increasing need
to coordinate resource planning and policy development;
NOW,THEREFORE,the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:
155
(copy)
THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME AGREES:
1.To recognize the Service's responsibility to conserve fish and wildlife
and their habitat and regulate human use on Service lands in
Alaska,in accordance with the National Park Service Organic Act,
ANILCA,and other applicable laws.
2.To manage fish and resident wildlife populations in their natural
species diversity on Service lands,recognizing that nonconsumptive
use and appreciation by the visiting public is a primary
consideration.
3.To consult with the Regional Director or his representative In a
timely manner and comply with applicable Federal laws and
regulations before embarking on management activities on Service
lands.
4.To act as the primary agency responsible for management of
subsistence uses of fish and wildlife on State and Service lands,
pursuant to applicable State and Federal laws.
5.To recognize that National Park areas were established,in part,to
"assure continuation of the natural process of biological succession"
and "to maintain the environmental integrity of the natural features
found in them."
THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AGREES:
1.To recognize the Department as the agency with the primary
responsibility to manage fish and resident wildlife within the State of
Alaska.
2.To recognize the right of the Department to enter onto Service lands
after timely notification to conduct routine management activities
which do not involve construction,disturbance to the land,or
alterations of ecosystems.
3.To manage the fish and wildlife habitat on Service lands so as to
ensure conservation of fish and wildlife populations and their
habitats in their natural diversity.
4.To cooperate with the Department in planning for management
activities on Service lands which require permits,environmental
assessments,compatibility assessments,or similar regulatory
documents by responding to the Department in a timely manner.
5.To consider carefully the impact on the State of Alaska of proposed
treaties or international agreements relating to fish and wildlife
resources which could diminish the jurisdictional authority of the
State,and to consult freely with the State when such treaties or
agreements have a significant impact on the State.
156
(copy)
6.To review Service policies in consultation with the Department to
determine if modified or special policies are needed for Alaska.
7.To adopt Park and Preserve management plans whose provisions are
in substantial agreement with the Department's fish and wildlife
management plans,unless such plans are determined formally to be
incompatible with the purposes for which the respective Parks and
Preserves were established.
8.To utilize the State's regulatory process to the maximum extent
allowed by Federal law in developing new or modifying existing
Federal regulations or proposing changes in existing State
regulations governing or affecting the taking of fish and wildlife on
Service lands in Alaska.
9.To recognize the Department as the primary agency responsible for
policy development and management direction relating to subsistence
uses of fish and wildlife resources on State and Service lands,
pursuant to applicable State and Federal laws.
10.To consult and cooperate with the Department in the design and
conduct of Service research or management studies pertaining to fish
and wildlife.
11.To consult with the Department prior to entering into any
cooperative land management agreements.
12.To allow under special use permit the erection and maintenance of
facilities or structures needed to further fish and wildlife
management activities of the Department on Service lands,provided
their intended use is not in conflict with the purposes for which
affected Parks or Preserves were established,
THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME AND THE NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE MUTUALLY AGREE:
1.To coordinate planning for management of fish and wildlife resources
on Service lands so that conflicts arising from differing legal
mandates,objectives,and policies either do not arise or are
minimized.
2.To consult with each other when developing policy,legislation,and
regulations which affect the attainment of wildlife resource
management goals and objectives of the other agency.
3.To provide to each other upon request fish and wildlife data,
information,and recommendations for consideration In the formulation
of policies,plans,and management programs regarding fish and
wildlife resources on Service lands.
157
(copy)
4.To recognize that the taking of fish and wildlife by hunting,
trapping,or fishing on certain Service lands in Alaska is authorized
in accordance with applicable State and Federal law unless State
regulations are found to be incompatible with documented Park or
Preserve goals,objectives or management plans.
5.To recognize for maintenance,rehabilitation,and enhancement
purposes,that under extraordinary circumstances the manipulation of
habitat or animal populations may be an important tool of fish and
wildlife management to be used cooperatively on Service lands and
waters in Alaska by the Service or the Department when judged by
the Service,on a case by case basis,to be consistent with
applicable law and Park Service policy.
6.That implementation by the Secretary of the Interior of subsistence
program recommendations developed by Park and Park Monument
Subsistence Resource Commissions pursuant to ANILCA Section
808(b)will take into account existing State regulations and will use
the State's regulatory process as the primary means of developing
Park subsistence use regulations.
7.To neither make nor sanction any introduction or transplant of any
fish or wildlife species on Service lands without first consulting with
the other party and complying with applicable Federal and State laws
and regulations.
8.To cooperate in the development of fire management plans which may
include establishment of priorities for the control of wildfires and
use of prescribed fires.
9.To consult on studies for additional wilderness designations and in
development of regulations for management of wilderness areas on
Service lands.
10.To resolve,at field office levels,all disagreements pertaining to the
cooperative work of the two agencies which arise in the field and to
refer all matters of disagreement that cannot be resolved at
equivalent field levels to the Regional Director and to the
Commissioner for resolution before either agency expresses its
position in public.
11.To meet annually to discuss matters relating to the management of
fish and wildlife resources on,or affected by,Service lands.
12.To develop such supplemental memoranda of understanding between
the Commissioner and the Regional Director as may be required to
implement the policies contained herein.
13.That the Master Memorandum of Understanding is subject to the
availability of appropriated State and Federal funds.
158
(copy)
14.That this Master Memorandum of Understanding establishes
procedural guidelines by which the parties shall cooperate,but does
not create legally enforceable obligations or rights.
15.That this Master Memorandum of Understanding shall become effective
when signed by the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish
and—Game and the Alaska Regional Director of the National Park
Service and shall continue in force until terminated by either party
by providing notice in writing 120 days in advance of the intended
date of termination.
16.That amendments to this Master Memorandum of Understanding may
be proposed by either party and shall become effective upon
approval by both parties.
STATE OF ALASKA
Department of Fish and Game
U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
By /s/Ronald O.Skoog
Ronald O.Skoog
Commissioner
By /s/John E.Cook
John E.Cook
Regional Director,Alaska
Date 14 October 1982 Date October 5,1982
59
APPENDIX H:LAND ACQUISITION AUTHORITY
94 STAT.2474 PUBLIC LAW 96-487—DEC.2,1980
LAND ACQUISITION AUTHORITY
16 use 3192.Sec.1302.(a)General Authority.—Except as provided in subsec-
tions (b)and (c)of this section,the Secretary is authorized,consistent
with other applicable law in order to carry out the purposes of this
Act,to acquire by purchase,donation,exchange,or otherwise any
lands within the boundaries of any conservation system unit other
than National Forest Wilderness.
(b)Restrictions.—Lands located within the boundaries of a conser-
vation system unit which are owned by
—
(A)the State or a political subdivision of the State;
(B)a Native Corporation or Native Group which has Natives as
a majority of its stocltholders;
(C)the actual occupant of a tract,title to the surface estate of
which was on,before,or after the date of enactment of this Act
conveyed to such occupant pursuant to subsections 14(cXl)and
Post,pp.2493,14(hX5)of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,unless the
24^'*-Secretary determines that the tract is no longer occupied for the
purpose described in subsections 14(cXl)or l4(liX5)for which the
tract was conveyed and that activities on the tract are or will be
detrimental to the purposes of the unit in which the tract is
located;or
(D)a spouse or lineal descendant of the actual occupant of a
tract described in subparagraph (C),unless the Secretary deter-
mines that activities on the tract are or will be detrimental to the
purposes of the unit in which the tract is located
—
may not be acquired by the Secretary without the consent of the
owner.
(c)Exchanges.—Lands located within the boundaries of a conser-
vation system unit (other than National Forest Wilderness)which
are owned by persons or entities other than those described in
subsection (b)of this section shall not be acquired by the Secretary
without the consent of the owner unless prior to final judgment on
the value of the aci^uired land,the owner,after being offered
appropriate land of similar characteristics and like value (if such
land is available from public lands located outside the boundaries of
any conservation system unit),chooses not to accept the exchange.In
identifying public lands for exchange pursuant to this subsection,the
Secretary shall consult with the Alaska Land Use Council.
(d)Improved Property.—No improved property shall be acquired
under subsection (a)without the consent of the owner unless the
Secretary first determines that such acquisition is necessary to the
fulfillment of the purposes of this Act or to the fulfillment of the
purposes for which the concerned conservation system unit was
established or eitpanded.
(e)Retained Rights.—The owner of an improved property on the
date of its aa^uisition,as a condition of such acquisition,may retain
for himself,his heirs and assigns,a right of use and occupancy of the
improved property for noncommercial residential or recreational
purposes,as the case may be,for a definite term of not more than
twenty-five years,or in lieu thereof,for a term ending at the death of
the owner or the death of his spouse,whichever is later.The owner
shall elect the term to be reserved.Unless the property is wholly or
partially donated,the Secretary shall pay to the owner the fair
market value of the owner's interest in the property on the date of its
acquisition,less the fair market value on that date of the right
retained by the owner.A right retained by the owner pursuant to tnis
section shall be subject to termination by the Secretary upon his
160
PUBLIC LAW 96-487—DEC.2,1980 94 STAT.2475
determination that such right is being exercised in a manner incon-
sistent with the purposes of this Act,and it shall terminate by
operation of law upon notification by the Secretary to the holder of
the right of such determination and tendering to him the amount
equal to the fair market value of that portion which remains
unexpired.
(0 Definition.—For the purposes of this section,the term "Improved
"improved property"means
—
property."
(1)a detached single family dwelling,the construction of which
was begun before January 1,1980 (hereinafter referred to as the
"dwelling"),together with the land on which the dwelling is
situated to the extent that such land—
(A)is in the same ownership as the dwelling or is Federal
land on which entry was legal and proper,and
(B)is designated by the Secretary to be necessary for the
enjoyment of the dwelling for the sole purpose of noncom-
mercisd residential use,together with any structures neces-
sary to the dwelling which are situated on the land so
designated,or
(2)property developed for noncommercial recreational uses,
together with any structures accessory thereto which were so
used on or before January 1,1980,to the extent that entry onto
such property was legal and proper.
In determining when and to what extent a property is to be consid-
ered an "improved property",the Secretary shall take into considera-
tion the manner of use of such buildings and lands prior to January 1,
1980,and shall designate such lands as are reasonably necessary for
the continued enjo)Tnent of the property in the same manner and to
the same extent as existed before such date.
(g)Consideration of Hardship.—The Secretary shall give prompt
and careful consideration to any offer made by the owner of any
property within a conservation system unit to sell such property,if
such owner notifies the Secretary that the continued ownership is
causing,or would result in,undue hardship.
(h)Exchange Authority.—Notwithstanding any other provision
of law,in acquiring lands for the purposes of this Act,the Secretary is
authorized to exchange lands (including lands within conservation
system units and within the National Forest System)or interests
therein (including Native selection rights)with the corporations
organized by the Native Groups,Village Corporations,Regional
Corporations,and the Urban Corporations,and other municipalities
and corporations or individuals,the State (acting free of the restric-
tions of section 6(i)of the Alaska Statehood Act),or any Federal 48 use note
agency.Exchanges shall be on the basis of equal value,and either P""^*^'^^
party to the exchange may pay or accept cash in order to equalize the
value of the property exchanged,except that if the parties agree to an
exchange and the Secretary determines it is in the public interest,
such exchanges may be made for other than equal value.
(iXD The Secretary is authorized to acquire by donation or
exchange,lands (A)which are contiguous to any conservation system
unit established or expanded by this Act,and (B)which are owned or
validly selected by the State of Alaska.
(2)Any such lands so acquired shall become a part of such
conservation system unit.
161
APPENDIX I:SPECIFIC LAND
PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS
Area 1
Owner:State of Alaska
Tract (Fairbanks T12S R9W,T12S R10W,T12S R11W,T13S
R7W,T13S R8W,T13S R9W,T13S RlOW,T13S R11W)
Size (acres):95,000 (approx.)
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:These lands have long been identified as belonging to
the original Mount McKinley National Park ecosystem.These
are essential to preserve habitat for moose,wolves,bear,
sheep,and caribou which migrate annually into the area from
present park lands.For the past several years the Denali
caribou herd has wintered in the Stampede area.Protection of
the area would maintain the integrity of the Savage,Sanctuary,
and Teklanika watersheds and preclude adverse development.
Recommended method of acquisition:Exchange
Priority:1
Area 2
Ow.isr:Geoprize,Ltd.;Swainbank (Nimbus 1-10,Nim 4-160)
Tracts AA 028909 and AA 029075 (Fairbanks T19S R10W)
Size (acres):3,420
Minimum interest needed:None (delete from park)
Justification:The National Park Service intends to exchange the
lands containing these mining claims for other lands,thus
excluding these claims from the boundary of the park.
Recommended method of deletion:Exchange
Priority:1
Area 3
Owner:Foster,Hawley,Zink (Golden Flower 1-6)
Tracts AA 023357-62 (Fairbanks T19S R10W)
Size (acres):60
Minimum interest needed:None (delete from park)
Justification:The National Park Service intends to exchange the
lands containing these mining claims for other lands,thus
excluding these claims from the boundary of the park.
Recommended method of deletion:Exchange
Priority:1
162
Area 4
Owner:Enserch (Golden Bob 14-16)
Tracts AA 029978-80 (Fairbanks T19S R11W)
Size (acres):60
Minimum interest needed:None (delete from park)
Justification:The National Park Service intends to exchange the
lands containing these mining claims for other lands,thus
excluding these claims from the boundary of the park.
Recommended method of deletion:Exchange
Priority:1
Area 5
Owner:Foster (Colorado 1-9)
Tract AA 023363-71 (Fairbanks T19S R10W)
Size (acres):180
Minimum interest needed:None (delete from park)
Justification:The National Park Service intends to exchange the
lands containing these mining claims for other lands,thus
excluding these claims from the boundary of the park.
Recommended method of deletion:Exchange
Priority:1
Area 6
Owner:32 patented lode claims,Kantishna
Tract
Size (acres):640 (20 each claim)
Minimum interest needed:Less than fee
Justification:These claims were originally staked for their mineral
interest.Acquisition of the surface estate would preclude
adverse development not directly connected with the mineral
industry.Such development might include subdivision,highrise
buildings,or development causing increased road travel over
the park road.Recent research has shown that increased
traffic along the park road is detrimental to park wildlife.In
addition,the surface of these lands is mostly undisturbed,and
attempts to develop would cause considerable scarring,loss of
vegetation,and erosion.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase interest in the
surface estate of each patented lode claim,reserving to the
owner the right to use the surface for the exploration and
development of the minerals
Priority:2
163
Area 7
Owner:Kantishna Mines,Anthony
Tract F 001169,2 lode claims (Whistler,Bright Light)
Size (acres):40.497
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:These claims are the only patented lode claims situated
on the west side of Moose Creek.They are covered with
vegetation.Acquisition could preclude further disturbance to
scenic and habitat values on the western side of the Moose
Creek valley.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:3
Area 8
Owner:Fuksa (Comstock 1-8,Eagles Den 1 and 2,Lucky Tuesday
1 and 2,Eldorado 1-4,and Virginia City 1 and 2)
Tracts FF 059042-49,FF 059032,33,FF 059027,28,FF058991-94,and
FF 058995,96 (Fairbanks T16S R18W)
Size (acres):360
Minimum interest needed:Mineral interest
Justification:All unpatented claims will undergo validity
determination.Acquisition of the mineral interest of valid
claims could prevent further disturbance at these sites for the
development of access and help maintain the scenic and habitat
values of this relatively less disturbed west side of the Moose
Creek drainage.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:4
Area 9
Owner:Taylor (Last Chance Creek lodes 1-6)
Tracts FF 052416-21
Size (acres):120
Minimum interest needed:Mineral interest
Justification:All unpatented claims will undergo validity
determination.Acquisition of the mineral interest of valid
claims could prevent further disturbance for the development of
access and further tailing piles at the sites.Protection of this
area will help maintain the scenic and habitat values in the
Caribou Creek drainage.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:4
164
Area 10
Owner:Northwest Exploration (Willow 1-8 and Liberty 22-54)
Tracts FF 59258-65 and FF 59209-41
Size (acres):820
Minimum interest needed:Mineral interest
Justification:All claims will undergo validity determinations.
Acquisition of the mineral interest of valid claims could prevent
further damage to scenic values and aquatic and riparian
habitat,maintain fish passage to Upper Moose Creek,and
maintain habitat for moose,birds,and other wildlife.Moose
Creek flows out of the Denali wilderness.It is popular with
hikers and backpackers and is readily accessible from the park
road.It supports a large grayling population.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase.The DOWLING study
appraised the value of these claims as follows:
Willow Creek 1-8 $83,000
Moose Creek below Rainy Creek 36,000
Moose Creek,Spruce Creek to Glen Creek 341,000
Moose Creek,Glen Creek to Rainy Creek 1,055,000
Priority:4
Area 11
Owner:Talkeetna Mines Trust,Jacobsen
Tract AA 05037,Tokachitna unpatented claims 1-8 (Seward T30N
R8W)
Size (acres):160
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:The area is currently without mining access in the
remote south of Denali National Park.Acquisition would
preclude impacts from development and access into this
otherwise primitive area of the park and would protect the
natural setting.
Recommended method of acquisition:Donation
Priority:5
Area 12
Owner:State of Alaska
Size (acres):640
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:Lands in these tracts are the only remaining
inholdings in the southwest preserve.Their acquisition would
consolidate management and ensure that highly scenic
undisturbed areas would not be changed by new development.
Recommended method of acquisition:Exchange
Priority:6
165
Area 13
Owner:Genet
Tract AA 5488 (Seward T30N R6W)
Size (acres):79.96
Minimum interest needed:Less than fee
Justification:This property is located on Pirate Lake near the snout
of the Ruth Glacier.Future development could be highly
visible to park visitors in the area.Present use is considered
compatible with park resources.If the boundary in this area is
changed to the Tokositna River (land exchange proposed
below),this property will no longer be within the park
boundary.If the land is not exchanged,an easement could
protect the area by limiting the amount and type of
development.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:7
Area 14
Owner:State of Alaska
Tract (Seward T29N R6W)
Size (acres):not available
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:A land exchange would place boundaries along the
Tokositna River and simplify identification by park visitors and
NPS and state officials.Basic acreage would not change.The
boundary would be the west bank of the Tokositna River.
Recommended method of acquisition:Exchange
Priority:8
Area 15
Owner:Barron
Tract AA 3990 (Seward T30N R6W)
Size (acres):47
Minimum interest needed:Less than fee
Justification:This property is located on the Tokositna River near
the mouth of the Ruth Glacier.Future development could be
highly visible to visitors floating the river.Present use is
considered compatible with park resources.If the boundary in
this area is changed to the Tokositna River (land exchange
proposed above),this property will no longer be within the
park boundary.If the land is not exchanged,an easement
could protect the property by limiting waterfront development,
providing screening from the river,and maintaining compatible
architecture.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:9
166
Area 16
Owner:Basil headquarters site
Tract AA 1076 (Seward T30N R6W)
Size (acres):4.98
Minimum interest needed:Less than fee
Justification:This property is located on the Tokositna River near
the terminus of the Ruth Glacier.Future development could be
highly visible to visitors floating the river.Present use is
considered compatible with park resources.If the boundary in
this area is changed to the Tokositna River,this property will
no longer be within the park boundary.If the land is not
exchanged,an easement could protect the property by limiting
waterfront development,providing screening from the river,
and maintaining compatible architecture.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:10
Area 17
Owner:State of Alaska
Size (acres):
Minimum interest needed:Cooperative agreement
Justification:Mining could occur in the beds of rivers determined to
be navigable,because title to these riverbeds is vested in the
state.The National Park Service needs to prevent the
degradation of habitat,water quality,and scenic values on all
rivers within the park boundary.A cooperative agreement with
the state of Alaska could preclude mineral entry and leasing
under state law and otherwise prevent the destruction of
riparian habitat and scenic values along any rivers determined
to be owned by the state.
Recommended method of acquisition:Cooperative agreement
Priority:11
Area 18
Owner:Application,AHTNA Native Corporation (12(b))
Tract FF 14844A2 (Fairbanks T17S R8W,sec.25,36,and T18S R8W,
sec.1)
Size (acres):2,073.0
Minimum interest needed:Less than fee
Justification:This area is adjacent to the community of Cantwell and
serves as habitat for moose in the Windy Creek drainage.The
area is at the base of the hills above the town and is forested.
Land sales,growth,and development could impact this area
which is now used by local rural residents for subsistence
purposes.A scenic easement could allow compatible
development and lessen impacts on habitat and other values.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:12
167
Area 19
Owner:Application,AHTNA Native Corporation
Tract AA 16172 (Fairbanks T18S R9W)
Size (acres):7,860
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:This area is important to the habitat and scenic values
of the adjacent Denali wilderness.
Recommended method of acquisition:Relinquishment
Priority:13
Area 20
Owner:AHTNA Native Corporation (12(c))
Tract AA 810402 (Fairbanks T17S R9W,sec.35,36)
Size (acres):375.0
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:This parcel is needed to maintain the integrity of the
watershed on the Foggy Pass side of the former Mount McKinley
National Park.The parcel blocks a small valley on the existing
park side and is important for the movement of wildlife.
Recommended method of acquisition:Exchange
Priority:14
Area 21
Owner:Application,Doyon,Ltd.(12(c))
Tract FF 02190156 (Fairbanks T10S R20W)
Size (acres):9,488.0
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:This area northeast of the Muddy River flats was set
aside by Congress because of its high resource values.It is
composed of wetlands and low wooded hills which serve as moose
habitat.Local rural residents depend primarily on these moose
for subsistence.Acquisition is necessary to preclude any land
disposal,subdivision,or adverse development in the area and
to maintain the habitat.
Recommended method of acquisition:Exchange
Priority:15
168
Area 22
Owner:Application,Doyon,Ltd.(12(c))
Tract FF 2190491 (Fairbanks T10S R21W)
Size (acres):19,662.0
IVlinimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:This is the northern end of the IVluddy River flats.
It is important marshland habitat for trumpeter swans and
seasonal riparian habitat for moose.Local rural residents
depend primarily on these moose for subsistence.Fee is
necessary to preclude any land disposal,subdivision,or
adverse development in the area.
Recommended method of acquisition:Relinquishment (or exchange,
as appropriate)
Priority:16
Area 23
Owner:Application,Doyon,Ltd.(14(h)(8))
Tracts FF 40216-219 (Fairbanks T11S R20W)
Size (acres):22,932 (5,760,5,697,5,715,and 5,760)
IVlinimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:These applications are at the north end of Lake
Chilchukabena,an area identified as important habitat for moose
and migrating waterfowl.Local rural residents rely on this
area for subsistence.This is the largest lake in the park,and
its shoreline should be protected for its scenic and other
values.Acquisition is needed to preclude any land disposal,
subdivision,or adverse development in the area.
Recommended method of acquisition:Exchange
Priority:17
Area 24
Owner:Application,Minchumina Natives,Inc.
Tracts AA 11184 (Fairbanks T11S R23W)and FF 22396 (T11S R22W)
Size (acres):2,890
IVlinimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:The tracts are near Lake Minchumina.This area is
important habitat for migrating waterfowl,including trumpeter
swans.If these lands are conveyed,acquisition will be
necessary to preclude adverse use,subdivision,or land
development.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase or exchange
Priority:18
169
Area 25
Owner:Sheldon headquarters site
Tract AA 445 (Fairbanks T22S R17W)
Size (acres):4.90
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:This is the only inholding on the McKinley massif and
contains the only man-made structure in an otherwise
mountain-wilderness setting.It currently serves as a shelter
for mountaineers and skiers in the Sheldon Amphitheater.The
present use is not in keeping with the long-term objective of
restoring this area to its natural pristine condition and keeping
it free of structures and incompatible uses.
Recommended method of acquisition:Purchase
Priority:19
Area 26
Owner:Application,Doyon,Ltd.
Tract FF 22715 (Fairbanks T12S R17W)
Size (acres):160
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:The area is a cemetery/historic site important to
native Athapascans.Designation as national park lands
currently protects these historic sites by federal law.These
lands and historic values should remain federally owned and can
be managed and protected respecting native concerns.
Recommended method of acquisition:Relinquishment
Priority:21
Area 27
Owner:Application,Doyon,Ltd.
Tract FF 22818 (Fairbanks T12S R21W,sec.6)
Size (acres):629
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:The area is a cemetery/historic site important to
native Athapascans.Designation as national park lands
currently protects these historic sites by federal law.These
lands and historic values should remain federally owned and can
be managed and protected respecting native concerns.
Recommended method of acquisition:Relinquishment
Priority:22
170
Area 28
Owner:Application,Doyon,Ltd.
Tract FF 22843 (Fairbanks T12S R21W,sec.11-13)
Size (acres):40
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:The area is a cemetery/historic site important to
native Athapascans.Designation as national park lands
currently protects these historic sites by federal law.These
lands and historic values should remain federally owned and can
be managed and protected respecting native concerns.
Recommended method of acquisition:Relinquishment
Priority:23
Area 29
Owner:University of Alaska (Stampede Mine)
Tract FF 79301 and 79302 (Ridge Claims 3 and 4)
Size (acres):21.552
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:Ridge Claims 3 and 4 are situated on a ridge above
the main block of the Stampede Mine claims.They have not
been mined.It is preferable that the activity at the Stampede
Mine be confined to the already disturbed area,which is more
out of sight and a mile away from the highly visible ridgetop.
Recommended method of acquisition:Relinquishment of the mineral
interest in the claims
Priority:24
Area 30
Owner:Application,State of Alaska
Tract F 034740 (Fairbanks T18S,R8W)
Size (acres):6,141
Minimum interest needed:Fee
Justification:Acquisition of an approximately 1,000-acre portion of
this parcel,from the ridgetop down the west drainage of Windy
Creek,is necessary to maintain the integrity of the Windy
Creek watershed.This area is adjacent to the town of
Cantwell.A cooperative agreement for the remainder of the
parcel will be sufficient.
Recommended method of acquisition:Relinquishment or exchange
Priority:none
171
Area 31
Owner:Application,state of Alaska
Tract FF 023477 (Fairbanks T11S R21W)
Size (acres):22,892.0
Minimum interest needed:Cooperative agreement
Justification:This area was set aside by Congress because of its
high resource values.It is composed of wetlands necessary for
migrating waterfowl and seasonally supports a large moose
population.Local rural residents depend on this area for
subsistence uses.The important wildlife habitat is a common
interest of the state of Alaska and the National Park Service.
To protect habitat and to maintain wildlife values,there should
be no land disposal,subdivision,or adverse development in the
area.
Recommended method of acquisition:Cooperative agreement with the
state of Alaska to protect the natural character of the area
Priority:None
Area 32
Owner:Travers
Tract F 29984 (Fairbanks T16S R17W,sec.29NW,NW)
Size (acres):0.517
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Current historical pattern of use is compatible with
park resources.If incompatible uses occurred or were
proposed,the National Park Service would want to acquire the
property.Subdivision,highrise buildings,improved access,or
other obtrusive development or use causing increased travel
over the park road would be considered incompatible uses.
Recent research has shown that increased travel on the park
road is detrimental to park wildlife.Part of this tract was
sold;however,a parcel 150'x 150'in the southwest corner was
retained by Mr.Travers.A small cabin sits on the property.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 33
Owner:Hunter
Tract F 9215 (Fairbanks T16S R17W,sec.19NE,20NW)
Size (acres):12
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Current historical pattern of use is compatible with
park resources.If incompatible uses occurred,the National
Park Service would want to acquire the property.Subdivision,
highrise buildings,improved access,or other obtrusive
development or development causing increased travel over the
park road would be considered incompatible uses.Recent
research has shown that increased travel on the park road is
detrimental to park wildlife.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
172
Area 34
Owner:Olsen homestead site
Tract F 2627 (Fairbanks T12S R17W,Diamond,AK)
Size (acres):15.39
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Use as a single residence or parttime residence
without further improvements to the land or improved access is
compatible.Otherwise,fee interest by purchase would be
recommended.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 35
Owner:Cole (Camp Denali)
Tract F 9215 (Fairbanks T16S R17W,sec.19NE and 20NW)
Size (acres):55.306
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:The current historical pattern of use is compatible
with park resources.If incompatible uses occurred the National
Park Service would want to acquire the property.Subdivision,
highrise buildings,improved access,or other obtrusive
development or development causing increased travel over the
park road would be considered incompatible uses.Recent
research has shown that increased travel on the park road is
detrimental to park wildlife.Camp Denali is a private lodge
which also operates guided activities in Denali National Park by
concession permit.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 36
Owner:Van Wickle homesite
Tract FF 6085 (Fairbanks T16S R17W,sec.09SE,NE,SE,SE and
lOSW,NW,SW,SW)
Size (acres):4.99
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Current historical pattern of use and access is
compatible with park resources.If incompatible uses occurred
the National Park Service would want to acquire the property.
Subdivision,highrise buildings,improved access,or other
obtrusive development or increased development causing
increased travel over the park road would be considered
incompatible uses.Recent research has shown that increased
travel on the park road is detrimental to park wildlife.This
property is highly visible.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
173
Area 37
Owner:Ashbrook homesite (Kantishna Roadhouse)
Tract F 20831 (Fairbanks T16S R18W,sec.13)
Size (acres):5.0
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Current historical pattern of use is compatible with
park resources.If incompatible uses occurred the National
Park Service would want to acquire the property.Subdivision,
highrise buildings,improved access,or other obtrusive
development or increased development causing increased travel
over the park road would be considered incompatible uses.
Recent research has shown that increased travel on the park
road is detrimental to park wildlife.This property is used
residentially and offers tourist facilities in the summer months.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 38
Owner:Hunter headquarters site (Eagle's Nest)
Tract F 34584 (Fairbanks T16S R17W,sec.17)
Size (acres):4.99
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Current historical pattern of use is compatible with
park resources.If incompatible uses occurred the National
Park Service would want to acquire the property.Subdivision,
highrise buildings,improved access,or other obtrusive
development or increased development causing increased travel
over the park road would be considered incompatible uses.
Recent research has shown that increased travel on the park
road is detrimental to park wildlife.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 39
Owner:Cole (Hawk's Nest)
Tract F 29984 (Fairbanks T16S R17W,sec.29NW,NW)
Size (acres):4.483
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Current historical pattern of use is compatible with
park resources.If incompatible uses occurred the National
Park Service would want to acquire the property.Subdivision,
highrise buildings,improved access,or other obtrusive
development or increased development causing increased travel
over the park road would be considered incompatible uses.
Recent research has shown that increased travel on the park
road is detrimental to park wildlife.This property is highly
visible from the park road.It is part of the Camp Denali
complex
.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
174
Area 40
Owner:Crabb (North Face Lodge)
Tract F 12691 (Fairbanks T16S R17W)
Size (acres):4.75
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Current historical pattern of use is compatible with
park resources.If incompatible uses occurred the National
Park Service would want to acquire the property.Subdivision,
highrise buildings,improved access,or other obtrusive
development or increased development causing increased travel
over the park road would be considered incompatible uses.
Recent research has shown that increased travel on the park
road is detrimental to park wildlife.This is a highly visible
property,situated on the park road past Wonder Lake.If it
was ever offered for sale,such sale,to be profitable,would
require extensive development of the property,which would
increase its visibility and road use.If such development
appeared imminent,the National Park Service would want to
purchase the property.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 41
Owner:John
Tract F 2624 (Fairbanks T12S R21W,sec.12W2)
Size (acres):160
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 42
Owner:Application,Duyck
Tract F 24288 (Fairbanks T11S R17W,sec.11N2)
Size (acres):80
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
175
Area 43
Owner:Menke
Tract FF 1268 (Fairbanks T11S R21W,parcel C,and
T11S R22W,parcel B)
Size (acres):80
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 44
Owner:Application,Chase
Tract FF 16597 (Fairbanks T11S R20W)
Size (acres):160
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 45
Owner:Nikolai
Tract FF 17523 (Fairbanks T15S R28W,sec.18A,and T16S R27W,
sec.28 and 33B)
Size (acres):160
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
176
Area 46
Owner:Nikolai
Tract FF 17524 (Fairbanks T15S R27W,sec.34)
Size (acres):80
IMinimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.The property sits between
Highpower and Deep creeks in the western end of the park.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 47
Owner:Rudolph Chase
Tract FF 17876 (Fairbanks T11S R20W,sec.31,and T12S R20W,
sec.6)
Size (acres):160
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 48
Owner:Application,Starr
Tracts FF 19491 C (Fairbanks T12S R20W,sec.9),FF 19491 B
(T11S R21W,sec.3 and 10),FF 19491 A (T11S R21W,sec.6),
and FF 19491 D (TllS R21W,sec.18)
Size (acres):160
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This is an Alaska native allotment.Present
residential use is compatible with park resources.The park
would want to acquire this property in fee if an adverse use
was imminent,to prevent further intrusions on lands basically
primitive in character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat
and subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision
or commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
177
Area 49
Owner:Harrison
Size (acres):0.25
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Present residential use is compatible with park
resources and uses of this area.The park would want to
acquire this property in fee if an adverse use was imminent,to
prevent further intrusions on lands basically primitive in
character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat and
subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision or
commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 50
Owner:Barb
Size (acres):0.25
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:Present residential use is compatible with park
resources and uses of this area.The park would want to
acquire this property in fee if an adverse use was imminent,to
prevent further intrusions on lands basically primitive in
character and to minimize impacts on wildlife habitat and
subsistence uses.Adverse uses would include subdivision or
commercial development.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Priority:None
Area 51
Owner:University of Alaska (Stampede Mine)
Tract FF 079305-7 and FF 59096-7 (Fairbanks T13S R15W)
Size (acres):
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This mineral interest is owned by the University of
Alaska,School of Mining.It is administered under an
agreement with the National Park Service.The National Park
Service intends to continue managing the area under the
agreement to provide educational opportunities to students.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Area 52
Owner:Cordasci (Absolution)
Tract AA 13539 (Fairbanks T20S R11W,sec.5NW)
Size (acres):20
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This claim will be examined for validity.If it is
determined valid,it will be managed according to federal and
state regulations to ensure land protection of the area.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
178
Area 53
Owner:Ohio Creek Mining Corp.(Glacier Queen)
Tract AA 034579 (Fairbanks T20S R12W,sec.18NE)
Size (acres):20
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:This claim will be examined for validity.If it is
determined valid,any operations will be managed according to
federal and state regulations to ensure land protection of the
area.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Area 54
Owner:Wilson (Don 1,2,9,and 10)
Tracts AA 032502-3 and AA 032510 (T20S R11W)
Size (acres):60
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:These claims will be examined for validity.If claims
are determined valid,any operations will be managed according
to federal and state regulations to ensure land protection of the
area.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Area 55
Owner:Unpatented lode claims,Kantishna Hills
Tract
Size (acres):1,320
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:All unpatented claims will undergo validity
determinations.On any valid unpatented lode claims,land
protection will be achieved through compliance with plans of
operations pursuant to title 36,Code of Federal Regulations ,
part 9(A),and other applicable state and federal laws.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
Area 56
Owner:Unpatented placer claims,Kantishna Hills
Tract
Size (acres):3,960
Minimum interest needed:None
Justification:All unpatented placer claims will undergo validity
determinations.On any valid claims,land protection will be
achieved through compliance with plans of operations pursuant
to title 36,Code of Federal Regulations ,part 9(A),and other
applicable state and federal laws.
Recommended method of acquisition:None
179
APPENDIX J:ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT COMPLIANCE
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
1011 E.TUDOR RD.
ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99503
(907)276-3800
Mr.Roger J.Contor,Regional Director
National Park Service,USDI
2525 Gambell Street
Anchorage,Alaska 99503
Dear Mr.Contor:
This responds to your April 4,1984,memorandum in which you requested
a list of threatened or endangered species present in Denali National Park
and Preserve and in three adjacent areas.Based on information
currently available to us,no listed or proposed threatened or endangered
species occur in the areas you identified.The only exception to this is
the possible presence of the endangered peregrine falcon (Faico
peregrinus anatum )during spring and fall migration.
There are currently 30 species of plants in Alaska which are considered
candidates for possible future listing under the Endangered Species Act.
Two of these,Smelowskia borealis var.villosa and Taraxacum
carneocoloratum ,are known to occur within the park/preserve.
Smelowskia borealis var.villosa is associated with calcareous screes at
high elevations on Sable Mountain,at Dry Creek,and at Rainbow
Mountain.Taraxacum carneocoloratum is an alpine species known from
Stoney Pass and two sites outside the planning area.Although not
presently afforded protection pursuant to the Endangered Species Act,we
urge you to consider these candidate species in the environmental
planning process.
We look forward to reviewing the general management plan when it is
available.Thank you for your continued interest in Alaska's endangered
wildlife.
Sincerely,
Assistant Regional Director
180
Alaska Regional Office
2525 Gambell Street,Room 107
Anchorage,Alaska 99503-2892
D18(AR0-0NR)
(X)N1621
Memorandum
To:Regional Director,United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Anchorage,Alaska
From:Acting Regional Director,Alaska Region,National Park Service
Subject:Section 7,Informal Consultation on Denali National Park and
Preserve General Management Plan
The National Park Service is currently developing a general management
plan for Denali National Park and Preserve.In order to insure that the
direction of the plan would not jeopardize any threatened or endangered
species within the park and preserve,input from the Fish and Wildlife
Service is requested.We would appreciate a list of threatened or
endangered plants or animals which occur within the park,and also those
which occur within adjacent lands,specifically the Tokositna drainage,
Curry Ridge and Byers Lake within Denali State Park,as the plan is
considering these sites as alternatives for potential development.Thank
you for your cooperation.
(sgd)Robert L.Peterson
bcc:
Joan Hirschman (DSC)
A.Lovaas:lf:04/03/84
181
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DENALI
NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE
1983 "Problem Analysis into the Decline of the Denali Caribou
Herd."Anchorage.
ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
1982 "Resource Management Recommendations for Denali National
Park and Preserve and Surrounding Area."Revised 1984.
ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE,U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
1980 Environmental Investigation and Site Analyses ,Tokositna ,
Denali State Park,Alaska .Prepared by Alaska Division of
State Parks and National Park Service,Denver Service
Center.
ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
n.d."Ethnohistory of Four Interior Alaskan Waterbodies,"by
Dianne Gudgel-Holmes.Division of Research and
Development,Anchorage.
1981 Scenic Resources Along the Parks Highway :Inventory and
Management Recommendations .Division of Research and
Development,Land and Resource Planning Section,
Anchorage.
1982 Alaska State Park System :Southcentral Region Plan .
Division of State Parks,Anchorage.
1984a Five-Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program .Anchorage,
1984b "Susitna Area Plan."Agency review draft.Division of Land
and Water Management,Anchorage.
1984c "Tanana Basin Plan."Agency review draft.Division of Land
and Water Management,Fairbanks.
1984d Personal communication with David Hedderly-Smith,Deputy
Director,Division of Mining.
1984e Personal communication with Chris Beck,Project Manager,
Susitna Area Plan.
ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1983 "Interior Alaska Transportation Study."Agency review
draft.Anchorage.
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
1983 Application for License for Major Project ,Susitna
Hydroelectric Project .18 vols.
183
ARCTIC ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION AND DATA CENTER
1979 Mineral Terranes of Alaska .Anchorage.
BANGS,EDWARD E.,ET AL.
1982 "Effects of Increased Human Populations on Wildlife Resources
on the Kenai Peninsula,Alaska."Paper presented at the
47th North American Wildlife Conference.
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT,U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
1981 Minchumina Land Settlement Final Environmental Assessment .
Anchorage.
1982 "Tanana-Minchumina Interagency Fire Management Plan."
Alaska Interagency Fire Management Council,Anchorage.
1984a Personal communication with Richard Gohl,Realty Officer,
Branch of Pipeline Monitoring.
1984b Personal communication with Mindy Gallagher,Lands Office,
Fairbanks.
DAVIS,CRAIG W.
1981 "Field Notes,Archeological Surveys within Denali National
Park and Preserve."On file at NPS Alaska Regional Office,
Anchorage.
DAVIS,CRAIG W.,AND HARVEY M.SHIELDS
1980 "Field Notes,Mount McKinley National Park Archeological
Reconnaissance."On file at NPS Alaska Regional Office,
Anchorage.
DAVIS,CRAIG W.,AND CHARLES E.HOLMES
1980 "Field Notes,Archeological Reconnaissance of the Kantishna
Mining District."On file at NPS Alaska Regional Office,
Anchorage.
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
1983 Personal communication with Dirk Derkson,Migratory Bird
Specialist.
DUMOND,DON E.
1977 The Eskimos and Aleuts .London:Thames and Hudson.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY,U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
1965 Physiographic Divisions of Alaska ,by Clyde Wahrhaftig.
Professional Paper 482.Washington,D.C.
GILBERT,WYATT G.
1979 A Geologic Guide to Mount McKinley National Park .
Anchorage:Alaska Natural History Association.
KING,JAMES G.,AND BRUCE CONANT
1981 "The 1980 Census of Trumpeter Swans on Alaskan Nesting
Habitats."American Birds (September).
184
KLEIN,DAVID R.
1980 "Reaction of Caribou and Reindeer to Obstructions--a
Reassessment."In Proceedings Second International
Reindeer /Caribou Symposium ,pp.519-27.
MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH
1983 Summary of Mineral Resources ,by Daniel E.Renshaw.
MORGAN,H.MORRIS
1965 "Archeological Survey of Mount McKinley National Park."
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
1953 A History of Mount McKinley National Park ,Alaska ,by Grant
H.Pearson,Superintendent.Denali National Park and
Preserve.
1974 Final Environmental Statement ,Mount McKinley National Park
Additions ,Alaska .Washington,D.C.
1979 "Moose Survey,Yentna Drainage,"by W.A.Troyer.Alaska
Regional Office,Anchorage.
1981a Environmental Overview and Analysis of Mining Effects,Denali
National Park and Preserve ,Alaska .Denver Service Center.
1981b "Movements of the Denali Caribou Herd,"by W.A.Troyer.
Alaska Regional Office,Anchorage.
1982a "Caribou Use of the Cantwell Calving Grounds,Denali
National Park and Preserve,Alaska,"by Sally Duff and
Francis J.Singer.Research/Resources Management Report
AR-1.Alaska Regional Office,Anchorage.
1982b Environmental Assessment for the Development Concept Plan ,
Denali Park Road Corridor ,Denali National Park and
Preserve .Denver Service Center.
1982c Natural and Cultural Resources Management Plan and
Environmental Assessment ,Denali National Park and Preserve .
Denali National Park and Preserve.
1983 "Syncretistical Approach to the Denali Visitor Transportation
System,Park Wildlife,and Associated Tourism Economy,
Denali National Park and Preserve,"by Robert C.
Cunningham.Denali National Park.
1984 "Wildlife Viewing and the Mandatory Public Transportation
System in Denali National Park,"by F.Singer and J.Beattie.
In preparation.Alaska Regional Office,Anchorage.
SUNDSTROM,THORD C.
1984 "An Analysis of Denali National Park and Preserve
Management Program to Educate Visitors Behavior While in
Bear Country."Masters thesis.University of Wyoming.
185
PLANGRAPHICS,INC.
1983 Alaska Coal Mined Land Inventory .
SELKREGG,LIDIA,ET AL.
1976 Alaska Regional Profiles .Vol.4:Yukon Region .
Anchorage:Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center,
University of Alaska.
SHELDON,CHARLES
1960 The Wilderness of Denali :Exploration of a Hunter-Naturalist
[n Northern Alaska .New York:Charles Scribner and Sons.
SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE,U.S.DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
AND ALASKA SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT
1983 Summary of Snow Survey Measurements for Alaska ,1951-1982 .
Anchorage.
TRACY,DIANE M.,AND FREDERICK DEAN
1977 "Possible Wildlife Responses to Stipulated Highway Design
Criteria for Mount McKinley National Park Road."On file at
Denali National Park and Preserve.
TREGANZA,ADAN E.
1964 "Archeological Survey of Mount McKinley National Park."On
file at NPS Alaska Regional Office,Anchorage.
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
1979 "Survey of Backcountry Users in Mount McKinley National
Park,Alaska:A Report for Management."Prepared for the
National Park Service by the Cooperative Park Studies Unit,
Seattle.On file at Denali National Park and Preserve.
U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
1983 Draft Environmental Impact Statement ,Kantishna Hills/Dunkle
Mine Study ,Denali National Park and Preserve ,Alaska .
Prepared for the Alaska Land Use Council by the National
Park Service,Denver Service Center.
1984 Final Environmental Impadt Statement ,Kantishna Hills /Dunkle
Mine Study ,Denali National Park and Preserve ,Alaska .
Prepared for the Alaska Land Use Council by the National
Park Service,Denver Service Center.
VALKENBURG,P.
1976 "A Study of the Brown Bear (Ursus arctos )in the Proposed
Northeastern Addition to Mount McKinley National Park."
M.S.thesis.University of Alaska,Fairbanks.
WEST,FREDERICK HADLEIGH
1965 "Excavations at Two Sites on the Teklanika River,Mount
McKinley National Park."On file at Denali National Park and
Preserve.
186
LIST OF PREPARERS
Robert Cunningham,Superintendent,Denali National Park and Preserve
Ralph Tingey,Management Assistant,Denali National Park and Preserve
John Dalle-Molle,Resources Management Specialist,Denali National Park
and Preserve
Linda Nebel,Chief of Planning and Recreation,Alaska Regional Office
Robert Schiller,Environmental Specialist,Denver Service Center
Jonathan Halpern,Ecologist,Denver Service Center
Charles Gilbert,Outdoor Recreation Planner,Alaska Regional Office
Bill Koning,Planner,Denver Service Center
John Ochsner,Senior Landscape Architect,Denver Service Center
Doug Cornell,Planner,Denver Service Center
Joan Hirschman,Environmental Specialist,Alaska Regional Office
Jacob Hoogland,Cultural Resources Specialist,Denver Service Center
Steve Burns,Landscape Architect,Denver Service Center
Craig Davis,Archeologist,Alaska Regional Office
CONSULTANTS
Jack Wiles,Chief of Planning,Alaska Division of Parks and Outdoor
Recreation
Bob Gerhardt,Park Ranger,Denali National Park and Preserve
Roger Robinson,Park Ranger,Denali National Park and Preserve
Dave Johnston,Park Ranger,Denali State Park
Larry Wilde,Superintendent,Mat-Su and Copper Basin Districts,Alaska
Division of Parks
187
As the nation's principal conservation agency,the Department of the
Interior has basic responsibilities to protect and conserve our land and
water,energy and minerals,fish and wildlife,parks and recreation
areas,and to ensure the wise use of all these resources.The
department also has major responsibility for American Indian reservation
communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S.
administration
.
Publication services were provided by the graphics and editorial staffs of
the Denver Service Center.NPS D-96
<U.S.GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1985—576-039 10028 REGION NO 8
m
Z
>
5o
=°>
5--
mzcmvnnm(/>
w
oo
^CJl
tsj >_1 ui I-^Oo>>
33 >55 -
m m 33 >
'r-m r->r-n -0
^m >„
gHoS
"^33 ^<°^Z3 ;=:
00 o
(O '^
m
>
J}H
S CmZ
5SOOn{/,
m
CO
Hm
O
33
C
om
TJ>
H
_m
Z ZH-»
i*O