DOCSLIB.ORG

Master Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Master Report NO. 128, ORIGINAL IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ________ OCTOBER TERM, 2003 ________ STATE OF ALASKA, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. ________ REPORT OF THE SPECIAL MASTER ON SIX MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ONE MOTION FOR CONFIRMATION OF A DISCLAIMER OF TITLE GREGORY E. MAGGS Special Master Washington, D.C. March 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................. 1 A. Procedure .................................. 1 B. Terminology and Basic Principles ............... 5 II. HISTORIC INLAND WATERS (Count I) ........... 9 A. Overview ................................. 10 B. Appropriateness of Summary Judgment .......... 17 C. Documents Submitted and Their Interpretation ... 23 1. Period of 1821-1867 ....................... 23 a. The Russian Imperial Ukase ............... 24 b. Treaties with the United States and Britain .... 25 c. The Dryad Incident ...................... 30 d. Expiration of the Treaties .................. 32 e. The Loriot Incident ....................... 33 f. State Department Notice to Mariners ......... 37 2. Period of 1867-1903 ....................... 38 a. The 1871 Treaty with Britain ............... 39 b. Fur Seal Arbitration ...................... 40 c. Statements by Government Officials ......... 42 3. The 1903 Boundary Arbitration Tribunal ....... 56 4. Period of 1903-1959 ....................... 63 a. North Atlantic Fisheries Arbitration ......... 63 b. Federal Fisheries Regulations .............. 65 c. League of Nations Conference .............. 72 d. A-B Line Negotiations with Canada ......... 75 e. Position of the State Department ............ 82 f. Hearings on Statehood Legislation ........... 85 g. General Policy Regarding Coastal Islands ..... 86 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) h. United Nations Studies ................... 88 5. Post-Statehood Period from 1959-Present ...... 89 a. The Organized Village of Kake Decision ...... 89 b. The United States v. California Brief ......... 96 c. The Pearcy Charts ....................... 99 d. Coastline Committee and Disclaimer ....... 101 e. Legal Adviser’s Memorandum ............. 103 f. Transit by Foreign Vessels ................ 104 D. Assessment of the Documents as a Whole ....... 107 1. Exercise of Sovereign Authority ............ 109 a. Documents Best Supporting the United States ...................................... 109 b. Documents Best Supporting Alaska ........ 115 c. All Other Documents .................... 126 d. Conclusion ............................ 129 2. Continuity of Exercise of Authority .......... 129 3. Acquiescence of Foreign Nations ............ 131 4. Vital Interests of the United States ........... 133 5. The Tarr Inlet Problem .................... 136 E. Conclusion ............................... 137 III. JURIDICAL BAYS (Count II) .................. 138 A. Overview ................................ 138 B. Factual Summary .......................... 142 1. North Bay and South Bay .................. 142 2. Sitka Sound ............................ 145 3. Cordova Bay ............................ 146 C. Assimilation of Islands ...................... 147 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 1. Factors Considered in Prior Cases ........... 148 2. Preliminary Disagreements about Factors ..... 153 a. Identity of Intervening Waters ............. 153 b. Configuration or Curvature of the Coast ..... 160 c. Size of an Island ........................ 162 d. Distance between Shores ................. 164 e. Tide for Assessing the Intervening Waters .... 165 f. Social and Economic Connections .......... 168 g. Effect of Dredging and Improvements ....... 169 h. Geologic Origin of the Islands ............. 171 i. Special Treatment of Fringing Islands ....... 172 j. Geographical Obviousness ................ 174 k. Sovereign Interests ...................... 176 3. Analysis of Factors ....................... 177 a. Kuiu Island and Kupreanof Island .......... 177 b. Kupreanof Island and Mitkof Island ........ 181 c. Mitkof Island and Dry Island .............. 185 d. Dry Island and the Mainland .............. 189 e. Partofshikof Island and Kruzof Island ....... 193 f. Kruzof, Baranof, and Partofshikof Island ..... 194 g. Prince of Wales Island and Dall Island ...... 196 4. Conclusion with Respect to Assimilation ..... 197 D. Juridical Bays under Article 7 ................ 198 1. Definition of a Bay under Article 7(2) ........ 199 2. Precedent under Article 7(2) ............... 200 3. Preliminary Disagreements ................ 201 a. Measurement of the Width of the Mouth ..... 201 b. Measurement of the Penetration of Bay ...... 205 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) c. Assessment of “Proportion” ............... 210 d. Meaning of “Landlocked” ................ 212 4. Application of Article 7(2) ................. 214 a. North Bay ............................. 214 b. South Bay ............................. 222 c. Cordova Bay ........................... 225 d. Sitka Sound ........................... 225 5. Conclusion ............................. 226 E. Conclusion ............................... 226 IV. THE GLACIER BAY NATIONAL MONUMENT (Count IV) ................................. 227 A. Overview ................................ 227 B. Analysis ................................. 229 1. Inclusion of Submerged Lands .............. 230 a. Notice to Congress of Inclusion ............ 232 b. Purposes of the Reservation ............... 242 2. Retention of Title at Statehood .............. 264 a. The Alaska Statehood Act (ASA) .......... 264 b. Function of ASA § 6(e)’s Proviso .......... 267 c. Coverage of ASA § 6(e)’s Proviso .......... 273 C. Conclusion ............................... 276 V. THE TONGASS NATIONAL FOREST (Count III) ........................................... 276 A. Overview ................................ 277 B. The Proposed Disclaimer .................... 282 C. Confirmation and Dismissal .................. 284 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 1. Positions of the Parties and Amici .......... 286 2. Analysis ............................... 288 D. Conclusion ............................... 294 VI. CONCLUSION ............................. 294 APPENDIX A Proposed Order Confirming the United States’ Disclaimer of Certain Marine Submerged Lands Within the Tongass National Forest .... 295 APPENDIX B Article 7 of the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, Apr. 29, 1958, [1964] 15 U.S.T. (pt. 2) 1607, T.I.A.S. No. 5639. ................................. 299 APPENDIX C Graphic Depiction of Claimed Historic Wa­ ters ................................... 301 APPENDIX D Graphic Depiction of Claimed Juridical Bays .. 303 APPENDIX E Chart Showing Dry Island, Mitkof Island, Kupreanof Island, and Kuiu Island .......... 305 v TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) APPENDIX F Chart Showing Kruzof Island, Baranof Island, and Partofshikof Island ................... 307 APPENDIX G Chart Showing Prince of Wales Island and Dall Island ............................. 309 APPENDIX H Large-Scale Map Showing Dry Island and Mitkof Island ........................... 311 APPENDIX I Illustration of the 45-Degree Test from Robert D. Hodgson & Lewis M. Alexander, Towards an Objective Analysis of Special Circum­ stances: Bays, Rivers, Coastal and Oceanic Archipelagos and Atolls, Law of the Sea Insti­ tute Occasional Paper No. 13 at 11, fig. 4 (Apr. 1972) ............................. 313 APPENDIX J Alaska’s Proposed Longest Straight Line of Penetration for South Bay ................. 315 APPENDIX K United States’ Proposed Longest Straight Line of Penetration for South Bay ............... 317 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) APPENDIX L Alaska’s Proposed Longest Straight Line of Penetration for North Bay ................. 319 APPENDIX M United States’ Proposed Longest Straight Line of Penetration for North Bay ............... 321 APPENDIX N Chart of the Glacier Bay National Monument .. 323 APPENDIX O Chart of Tongass National Forest ........... 325 vii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Metlakatla Indian Comm., Annette Island Reserve v. Egan, 363 U.S. 555 (1960) .............................. 91 Alaska v. United States, 530 U.S. 1228 (2000) .......... 1 Alaska v. United States, 532 U.S. 902 (2001) ....... 4, 279 Alaska v. United States, 662 F. Supp. 455 (D. Alaska 1987), aff'd sub nom. Alaska v. Ahtna Inc., 891 F.2d 1401 (1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 919 (1990) .................. 290 American Title Ins. Co. v. Lacelaw Corp., 861 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1988) ..................................... 256 Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., 488 U.S. 428 (1989) .................................. 7 Bowles v. Seminole Rock Co., 325 U.S. 410 (1945) .... 241 California v. Arizona, 440 U.S. 59 (1979) .......... 2, 285 Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) ......... 250 Coyle v. Smith, 221 U.S. 559 (1911) .................. 3 viii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES (Continued) Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway), 1951 I.C.J. 116 ....................................... 62, 208, 209 Idaho v. United States, 533 U.S. 262 (2001) .. 229-232, 234, 238, 239, 242, 243, 261 LaFargue v. United States, 4 F. Supp. 2d 580 (E.D. La. 1998) .............................................. 292 Lee v. United States, 809 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1987), cert. denied sub nom. Lee v. Eklutna, Inc., 484 U.S. 1041 (1988) .............................................. 290 Leisnoi Inc. v. United States, 313 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2002) .............................................. 290 Local Number 93, Intern. Ass'n of Firefighters v. City of Cleveland, 478 U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alaska's Glaciers S Glaciers Inside Passage
    AALASKALASKA’S GGLACIERSLACIERS AANDND TTHH E IINSIDENSIDE PPASSAGEASSAGE J UUNEAUN E A U ♦ S IITKAT K A ♦ K EETCHIKANT C H I K A N ♦ T RRACYA C Y A RRMM A LLASKAA S KA ' S M AAGNIFICENTG N I F I C E N T C OOASTALA S TA L G LLACIERSA C I E R S M IISTYS T Y F JJORDSO R D S ♦ P EETERSBURGT E R S B U R G ♦ V AANCOUVERN C O U V E R A voyage aboard the Exclusively Chartered Small Ship Five-Star M.S. LL’A’AUUSTRALSTRAL July 18 to 25, 2015 ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Dear Villanova Traveler, Arctic-blue glaciers, rarely observed marine life, pristine waters, towering mountains, untouched coastlines and abundant wildlife. These are the wondrous sights that will unfold around you on this comprehensive and exceptional Five-Star small ship cruise of Alaska’s glaciers and the Inside Passage, last of the great American frontiers. Enjoy this one-of-a-kind pairing of Five-Star accommodations with exploration-style travel as you cruise the Inside Passage from Juneau, Alaska, to Vancouver, British Columbia, during the divine long days of summer. Exclusively chartered for this voyage, the Five-Star small ship M.S. L’AUSTRAL, specially designed to navigate the isolated inlets and coves of the Inside Passage inaccessible to larger vessels, brings you up close to the most spectacular scenery of southeastern Alaska and Canada, offering you a superior wildlife-viewing experience—from sheltered observation decks, during Zodiac expeditions led by seasoned naturalists and from the comfort of 100% ocean-view Suites and Staterooms, most with a private balcony.
    [Show full text]
  • The Alaska Boundary Dispute
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository University of Calgary Press University of Calgary Press Open Access Books 2014 A historical and legal study of sovereignty in the Canadian north : terrestrial sovereignty, 1870–1939 Smith, Gordon W. University of Calgary Press "A historical and legal study of sovereignty in the Canadian north : terrestrial sovereignty, 1870–1939", Gordon W. Smith; edited by P. Whitney Lackenbauer. University of Calgary Press, Calgary, Alberta, 2014 http://hdl.handle.net/1880/50251 book http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 International Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca A HISTORICAL AND LEGAL STUDY OF SOVEREIGNTY IN THE CANADIAN NORTH: TERRESTRIAL SOVEREIGNTY, 1870–1939 By Gordon W. Smith, Edited by P. Whitney Lackenbauer ISBN 978-1-55238-774-0 THIS BOOK IS AN OPEN ACCESS E-BOOK. It is an electronic version of a book that can be purchased in physical form through any bookseller or on-line retailer, or from our distributors. Please support this open access publication by requesting that your university purchase a print copy of this book, or by purchasing a copy yourself. If you have any questions, please contact us at ucpress@ ucalgary.ca Cover Art: The artwork on the cover of this book is not open access and falls under traditional copyright provisions; it cannot be reproduced in any way without written permission of the artists and their agents. The cover can be displayed as a complete cover image for the purposes of publicizing this work, but the artwork cannot be extracted from the context of the cover of this specificwork without breaching the artist’s copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • North Pacific Research Board Project Final Report
    NORTH PACIFIC RESEARCH BOARD PROJECT FINAL REPORT Synthesis of Marine Biology and Oceanography of Southeast Alaska NPRB Project 406 Final Report Ginny L. Eckert1, Tom Weingartner2, Lisa Eisner3, Jan Straley4, Gordon Kruse5, and John Piatt6 1 Biology Program, University of Alaska Southeast, and School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 11120 Glacier Hwy., Juneau, AK 99801, (907) 796-6450, [email protected] 2 Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska Fairbanks, P.O. Box 757220, Fairbanks, AK 99775-7220, (907) 474-7993, [email protected] 3 Auke Bay Lab, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 17109 Pt. Lena Loop Rd., Juneau, AK 99801, (907) 789-6602, [email protected] 4 University of Alaska Southeast, 1332 Seward Ave., Sitka, AK 99835, (907) 774-7779, [email protected] 5 School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 11120 Glacier Hwy., Juneau, AK 99801, (907) 796-2052, [email protected] 6 Alaska Science Center, US Geological Survey, Anchorage, AK, 360-774-0516, [email protected] August 2007 ABSTRACT This project directly responds to NPRB specific project needs, “Bring Southeast Alaska scientific background up to the status of other Alaskan waters by completing a synthesis of biological and oceanographic information”. This project successfully convened a workshop on March 30-31, 2005 at the University of Alaska Southeast to bring together representatives from different marine science disciplines and organizations to synthesize information on the marine biology and oceanography of Southeast Alaska. Thirty-eight individuals participated, including representatives of the University of Alaska and state and national agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin of the United States Fish Commission
    SALMON-TAGGING EXPERIMENTS IN ALASKA, 1924 AND 1925 1 .:I- By WILLIS H. RICH, Ph. D. Director, U. S. Biological Station, Seattle, Wash; .:I­ CONTENTS Page Introduction _ 109 Experiments in southeastern Alaska__hhu u __nn_h__u u u _ 116 Tagging record _ 116 Returns from experiments in Icy Strait__ n h_u u_..u u _ 119 Returns from experiments in Frederick Sound u huh _ 123 Returns from experiments in Chatham Strait; h u • _ 123 Returns from experiments in Sumner Strait, u_uuu .. u _ 128 Returns from experiments at Cape Muzon and Kaigani Point, ~ _ 135 Returns from experiments at Cape Chacon u n u h _ 137 Returns from experiments near Cape Fox and Duke Islandu _ 141 Variations in returns of tagged fish; h _u u n n h n __ h u_ 143 Conelusions _ 144 Experiments at Port Moller, 1925un__h_uu uu __ 145 INTRODUCTION The extensive salmon-tagging experiments conducted during 1922 and 1923 2 in the region of the Alaska Peninsula proved so productive of information, both of scientific interest and of practical application in the care of these fisheries, that it was considered desirable to undertake similar investigations in other districts; Accordingly, experiments were carried on in southeastern Alaska in 1924 and again in 1925. In 1925, also, at the request of one of the companies engaged in packing salmon in the Port Moller district, along the northern shore of the Alaska Penin­ sula, the work done there in 1922 was repeated. The results of these experiments form the basis for the following report.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Tideland Surveys
    Alaska Tideland Surveys “Who, What, When, Where, How, Why” A Paper Presented at the th 37 Annual Alaska Surveying and Mapping Conference By Gerald Jennings, P.L.S., and Joe Kemmerer, P.L.S. February, 2002 State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Mining, Land and Water, Technical and Data Management 550 West 7th Ave, Suite 650 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3576 (907) 269-8523 Fax (907) 269-8914 ii ABSTRACT Alaska Tideland Surveys – the 5 w’s. Surveys of tideland parcels are unique in several ways. Typically all corners are monumented with witness corners. DNR is usually the fee owner of the parcel, and the landward boundary is usually the mean high water line. Frequently, the line is fixed and limiting, because of avulsion, or placement of fill. This paper will briefly discuss how an applicant applies for a tideland lease or conveyance and how to conduct the survey and obtain state approval. Presenter: Gerald Jennings The Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Technical and Data Management staff dealing with Alaska Tideland Surveys: Gerald Jennings, P.L.S., Statewide Platting Supervisor Joe Kemmerer, P.L.S., Coastal Boundary. William (Bill) Brown, P.L.S., Riparian Specialist iii Alaska Tideland Surveys Introduction – who what why? Title to most of the tide and submerged lands surrounding Alaska was vested in the State of Alaska under the Submerged Lands Act of May 22, 1953. Most of those lands remain in state ownership and in most cases, the state will lease, but retain fee title. As a surveyor, you will be contacted about Alaska Tideland Surveys (ATS) by a public or private party who desires to lease or acquire tidelands for various reasons such as construction of docks, bridges, harbors, log transfer facilities, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of Hyder and Vicinity Southeastern Alaska
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Roy O. West, Secretary U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY George Otis Smith, Director Bulletin 807 GEOLOGY OF HYDER AND VICINITY SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA WITH A RECONNAISSANCE OF CHICKAMIN RIVER BY A. F. RUDDINGTON UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1&29 ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS TJ.S.OOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 35 CENTS PER COPY CONTENTS Page Foreword, by Philip S. Smith._________________________ vn Introduction...____________________________________________________ 1 Field work_.._.___._.______..____...____. -_-__-. .. 1 Acknowledgments. _-_-________-_-___-___-__--_____-__-- -____-_ 2 History._________________________________________________________ 2 Bibliography ________-______ _____________._-__.-___-__--__--_--_-_ 3 Alaska.__-___-__---______-_-____-_-___--____-___-_-___-__-___ & British Columbia____-_____-___-___________-_-___--___.._____- 4 Geography_______________________________________-____--___-__--_ 4 Location and transportation facilities.___________________________ 4 Climate. __--______-______.____--__---____-_______--._--.--__- 5 Vegetation ___________________________________________________ 6 Water power._--___._____.________.______-_.._____-___.-_____ 7 Topography-___________--____-_-___--____.___-___-----__--_-- 7 General features of the relief----______-_---___-__------_-_-_ 7 Streams.._ _______________________________________________ 9 Glaciation.. _ __-_____-__--__--_____-__---_____-__--_----__ 10 Geology.... __----_-._ -._---_--__-.- _-_____-_____-___-_ 13 General features___-_-____-__-__-___-..____--___-_-____--__-._ 13 Hazelton group._....._.._>___-_-.__-______----_-----'_-__-..-- 17 General character.-----.-------.-------------------------- 17 Greenstone and associated rocks.._______.__.-.--__--_--_--_ 18 Graywacke-slate division.._________-_-__--_-_-----_--_----_ 19 Coast.Range intrusives__________-__-__--___-----------_-----_- 22 Texas Creek batholith and associated dikes..__--__.__-__-__-.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska's Glaciers and the Inside Passage
    ALASKA’s GlaCIERS AND THE INSIDE PASSAGE E S TABLISHED 1984 Point FIVE-STAR ALL-SUITE SMALL SHIP Inian Islands Adolphus JUNEAU ALASKA Elfin Icy Strait Sawyer FAIRBANKS U.S. 4 Cove Glacier Denali CANADA National ANCHORAGE EXCLUSIVELY CHARTERED Tracy Arm Park JUNEAU Inside Endicott Arm Passage M.V. STAR LEGEND Peril Misty Fjords Dawes Glacier KETCHIKAN Strait Gulf of Alaska Frederick VANCOUVER Sound SITKA C h a WRANGELL t Cruise Itinerary h a The Narrows Air Routing m Train Routing S t r Land Routing a i Inside Passage t KETCHIKAN JULY 5 TO 12, 2018 ◆◆ Only 106 Five-Star Suites ITINERARY* ◆◆ Walk-in closet and large sitting area Juneau, Tracy Arm, Sitka, Wrangell, Ketchikan, Alaska’s Magnificent Glaciers and ◆◆ 100% ocean-view, all-Suite accommodations Inside Passage, Vancouver ◆◆ Small ship cruises into ports inaccessible 1 Depart home city/Arrive Juneau, Alaska, U.S./ to larger vessels Embark M.V. STAR LEGEND ◆◆ Unique, custom-designed itinerary 2 Tracy Arm Fjord/Sawyer Glacier/ Endicott Arm/Dawes Glacier ◆◆ A shore excursion included in each port 3 Point Adolphus/Inian Islands/Elfin Cove ◆◆ Complimentary alcoholic and nonalcoholic 4 Sitka beverages available throughout the cruise 5 Wrangell ◆◆ 6 Ketchikan Once-in-a-lifetime offering! 7 Cruising the Inside Passage ◆◆ Certified “green” clean ship 8 Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada/ Disembark ship/Return to home city oin this one-of-a-kind, exploration-style cruise through Jthe Inside Passage from Juneau to Vancouver during the long days of summer aboard the exclusively chartered Five-Star, all-Suite, small ship M.V. STAR LEGEND. Navigate isolated inlets inaccessible to larger vessels for superior views of Alaska’s spectacular scenery.
    [Show full text]
  • Southeast Alaska Mid-Region Access Port and Ferry Terminal Technical Memorandum
    S A M-R A P Ferr T T M Prepared for Fr Highw An Through R Pecci Associates, I. 825 Custer Avenue Helena, Montana 59604 (406)447-5000 www.rpa-hln.com Prepared by T Gos Associates, I. 1201 Western Avenue, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 www.glosten.com Pametri, I. 700 NE Multnomah, Suite 1000 Portland, OR 97232-4110 T. 503.233.2400 F, 503.233.4825 www.parametrix.com CITATION The Glosten Associates, Inc., Parametrix, Inc. 2011. Southeast Alaska Mid-Region Access Port and Ferry Terminal Technical Memorandum. Prepared by The Glosten Associates, Inc., Seattle, Washington, Parametrix, Inc., Portland, Oregon. April 2011. Port and Ferry Terminal Technical Memorandum TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... ES-1 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Purpose of the Mid-Region Access Study ......................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Southeast Alaska Mid-Region Access Study Corridors ..................................................... 1-3 1.2.1 Bradfield Canal Corridor ....................................................................................... 1-3 1.2.2 Stikine River Corridor ........................................................................................... 1-5 1.2.3 Aaron Creek Corridor............................................................................................ 1-5 1.3 Characteristics
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Prioritization of Prince of Wales Island
    CONSERVATION PRIORITIZATION OF PRINCE OF WALES ISLAND Identifying opportunities for private land conservation Prepared by the Southeast Alaska Land Trust With support from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Alaska Coastal Conservation Program February 2013 Conservation prioritization of Prince of Wales Island Conservation prioritization of Prince of Wales Island IDENTIFYING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PRIVATE LAND CONSERVATION INTRODUCTION The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) awarded the Southeast Alaska Land Trust (SEAL Trust) a Coastal Grant in 2012. SEAL Trust requested this grant to fund a conservation priority analysis of private property on Prince of Wales Island. This report and an associated Geographic Information Systems (GIS) map are the products of that work. Driving SEAL Trust’s interest in conservation opportunities on Prince of Wales Island is its obligations as an in-lieu fee sponsor for Southeast Alaska, which makes it eligible to receive fees in-lieu of mitigation for wetland impacts. Under its instrument with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers1, SEAL Trust must give priority to project sites within the same 8-digit Hydrologic Unit (HUC) as the permitted impacts. In the past 10 years, SEAL Trust has received a number of in-lieu fees from wetlands impacted by development on Prince of Wales Island, which, along with its outer islands, is the 8-digit HUC #19010103 (see Map 1). SEAL Trust has no conservation holdings or potential projects on Prince of Wales Island. In an attempt to achieve its conservation goals and compliance with the geographic elements of the Instrument, SEAL Trust wanted to take a strategic approach to exploring preservation possibilities in the Prince of Wales HUC.
    [Show full text]
  • Yellow-Cedar Decline in the North Coast Forest District of British Columbia
    United States Department of Agriculture Yellow-Cedar Decline in the Forest Service North Coast Forest District Pacific Northwest Research Station of British Columbia Research Note PNW-RN-549 Paul E. Hennon, David V. D’Amore, Stefan Zeglen, and October 2005 Mike Grainger1 Abstract The distribution of a forest decline of yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis (D. Don) Örsted) has been documented in southeast Alaska, but its occurrence in British Columbia was previously unknown. We conducted an aerial survey in the Prince Rupert area in September 2004 to determine if yellow-cedar forests in the North Coast Forest District of British Columbia were experiencing a similar fate as in nearby Alaska. Numerous large areas of concentrated yellow-cedar mortality were found, extending the known distribution of the decline problem 150 km south of the Alaska–British Columbia border. The forests with the most concentrated tree death occurred at 300 to 400 m elevation, frequently on south aspects. The appearance of these forests including proximity to bogs; mixtures of dying, recently killed, and long-dead trees; and crown and bole symptoms of dying trees were all consistent with the phenomenon in southeast Alaska. Introduction 2 Yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis (D. Don) Örsted) decline (fig. 1) extends over 200 000 ha in a broad band through southeast Alaska to the Alaska–British Columbia border along Portland Canal (fig. 2) (Wittwer 2004). The problem is specific to yellow-cedar and is characterized on the landscape as a progressive and intensifying process that results in fading trees with thin or offcolor crowns and numerous standing dead trees, some killed recently and others up to 100 1 Paul E.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Mineral Deposits of Jumbo Basin Southeastern Alaska
    Geology and Mineral Deposits of Jumbo Basin Southeastern Alaska GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 251 Geology and Mineral Deposits of Jumbo Basin Southeastern Alaska By GEORGE C. KENNEDY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 251 A discussion of the contact metamorphism, geomagnetic surveys, magnetite deposits, and iron ore reserves of part of Prince of Whales Island. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1953 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. CONTENTS Page Page Abstract. __________________________________________ 1 Contact metamorphism—Continued Introduction ______________________________________ 1 Metamorphism in the vicinity of the Magnetite Cliff Previous work. _ _ _______________________________ 1 bodies—Continued Present work- ________ 1 Metamorphism of the schists.________________ 20 Acknowledgments. ______________ _______________ 2 Metamorphism of the dike rocks._____________ 20 Geography__ _______________________________________ 2 Metamorphism in the vicinity of the upper magnetite Location and accessibility________________________ 2 bodies_ _______________________---_----_-_____ 21 Topography. ____________________________!______ 3 Exomorphism of the marble__________________ 21 Climate, water supply, and vegetation. ____________ 4 Endomorphism of the intrusive rocks__________ 22 History and production______________________________ 4 Metamorphism
    [Show full text]
  • PRINCE of WALES ISLAND and VICINITY by Kenneth M
    MINERAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE KETCHIKAN MINING DISTRICT, ALASKA, 1991: PRINCE OF WALES ISLAND AND VICINITY By Kenneth M. Maas, Jan C. Still, and Peter E. Bittenbender U. S. DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary BUREAU of MINES T S Ary, Director OFR 81-92 CONTENTS Page Abstract s 1 Introduction 2 Location and Access .............................................. 2 Land Status . .................................................... 4 Acknowledgments ................................................. 4 Previous Studies: Northern Prince of Wales Island .......................... 6 Mining History: Northern Prince of Wales Island .......................... 7 Geologic Setting: Northern Prince of Wales Island .......................... 10 Bureau Investigations ............... ................................ 10 Northern Prince of Wales Island subarea ............................... 12 Craig subarea . .................................................. 12 Dall Island subarea ............................................... 13 Southeast Prince of Wales Island subarea ............................... 14 References . ...................................................... 15 Appendix A. - Analytical results ....................................... 19 Appendix B. - Sampling and analytical procedures ......................... 67 ILLUSTRATIONS 1. Ketchikan Mining District: 1991 study area showing Prince of Wales Island and vicinity. 3 2. Generalized land status map for Northern Prince of Wales Island 5 3. Generalized geologic map for Northern
    [Show full text]