DOCSLIB.ORG

JAI FSEIS Chapter 3 Affected Environment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
JAI FSEIS Chapter 3 Affected Environment Juneau Access Improvements Project Final SEIS Affected Environment 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1 Social and Economic Environment 3.1.1 Land Use The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) updated the 2004 Land Use and Coastal Management Technical Report, presented as Appendix F in the 2005 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Supplemental Draft EIS), and its addendum, presented in Appendix W of the 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS). The Land Use Technical Report, Revised1 Appendix DD of this Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), presents new information from the 2016 Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan (TLRMP), Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), City and Borough of Juneau (CBJ), Municipality of Skagway Borough, Haines Borough, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, interviews conducted by Northern Economics, Inc., and personal communications with agency representatives. Additional contacts were made with federal, State, and local officials and private parties to update planning, land management, and land use information. The project area includes federal, State, local, and private lands. Most of the federal lands are within the Tongass National Forest and are managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The other federal land in the study area is Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park (NHP) in downtown Skagway, which is administered by the National Park Service (NPS). The principal discussion on Klondike Gold Rush NHP is provided in Section 3.1.1.2. A majority of the State lands in the project area are within the Haines State Forest along West Lynn Canal and are managed by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) Division of Forestry. Local government lands are managed by the CBJ, Haines Borough, and the Municipality of Skagway Borough. Private lands include Native corporation holdings, Native allotments, private commercial, and private residential properties. Important changes in the project study area since preparation of the 2006 Final EIS are that the City of Skagway is now the Municipality of Skagway Borough, and the Kensington Mine is in production. Figures 3-1 and 3-2 (all Chapter 3 figures are at the end of the chapter) depict land ownership on the northern and southern ends of Lynn Canal, respectively. Primary landowners and managers in the study area are described further in the following subsections. 3.1.1.1 United States Forest Service Most of the lands in the study area are managed by the USFS as part of the Tongass National Forest. Management direction for these lands is set forth in the 2016 TLRMP (USFS, 2016a). The 2016 TLRMP updated the 1997 Tongass Land and Resource Management Plan (USFS, 1997b; referred to as the TLMP in the 2006 Final EIS) and the 2008 TLRMP (USFS 2008b), which was referenced in the 2014 Draft SEIS. It guides natural resource decision making in the Tongass National Forest by establishing management standards and guidelines for a variety of 1 This SEIS is based on the 2014 Draft SEIS and substantive changes have been highlighted in gray for easy identification by the reader. 3-1 Juneau Access Improvements Project Final SEIS Affected Environment activities, based on Land Use Designations (LUDs)2. Figure 3-3 identifies LUDs within the study area. Two main LUD categories were established in the TLRMP: Non-Development (which maintains old-growth forest habitat) and Development. Each LUD category consists of subcategories of LUD designations, which are described below. (Note that not all of these LUDs occur in the Lynn Canal corridor.) Non-Development LUDs • Wilderness LUD Group o Wilderness – Preserve essentially unmodified areas to provide opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation. Roads and trails for motorized access are “not permitted except where authorized by the ANILCA [Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act] and to access surrounded state and private land and valid mining claims subject to stipulations to protect Wilderness resources and values” (USFS, 2016a, p. 3-20). o Wilderness National Monument – Manage monuments to provide opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation. Limit motorized access. o Non-Wilderness National Monument – Facilitate the development of mineral resources in a manner compatible with the National Monument purposes. • Natural Setting LUD Group o LUD II – Maintain the wildland characteristics of these Congressionally designated roadless areas; permit fish and wildlife improvements and primitive recreation facilities; and permit roads for access for transportation needs identified by the State. o Old-Growth Habitat – Maintain old-growth forests in a natural or near-natural condition for wildlife and fish habitat. “New road construction is generally inconsistent with Old- growth Habitat LUD objectives, but new roads may be constructed if no feasible alternative is available.” (USFS, 2016a, p. 3-62) o Research Natural Areas – Manage areas for research and education and/or to maintain natural diversity of National Forest System lands. o Remote Recreation – Provide for recreation in remote natural settings outside Wilderness, where opportunities for solitude and self-reliance are high. o Semi-Remote Recreation – Provide for recreation and tourism in natural-appearing settings, where opportunities for solitude and self-reliance are moderate to high. o Enacted Municipal Watersheds – Manage municipal watersheds to meet State water quality standards for domestic water supply. o Special Interest Areas – Preserve areas with unique archaeological, historical, scenic, geological, botanical, or zoological values. o Wild, Scenic, and Recreational Rivers – Maintain and enhance the outstandingly remarkable values of river segments, which qualify a river to be classified as a Wild, Scenic, or Recreational River. 2 An LUD is a management prescription allocated to specific areas of National Forest System land. 3-2 Juneau Access Improvements Project Final SEIS Affected Environment Development LUDs • Modified Landscapes – Provide for natural-appearing landscapes while allowing timber harvest and a mix of resource activities, including mineral development. • Scenic Viewsheds – Maintain scenic quality in areas viewed from popular land and marine travel routes and recreation areas, while permitting timber harvest. • Experimental Forest – Provide opportunities for forest practices research and demonstration. • Timber Production – Manage the area for industrial wood production. Promote conditions favorable for timber resources and for maximum long-term timber production. In addition to the LUDs, the 2016 TLRMP provided Standards and Guidelines for Transportation Systems Corridors (TSCs). The plan direction for TSCs is to facilitate the availability of National Forest land for the development of existing and future TSCs, such as those identified by the State of Alaska in the Southeast Alaska Transportation Plan (2004) and in applicable laws (e.g., Section 4407 of Public Law 109-59, and Title XI of ANILCA, Public Law 96-487) (USFS, 2016a, p. 5-11). See also Section 3.1.1.3 regarding Section 4407 easements. The TSC concept of the 2016 TLRMP replaced the Transportation Utility System (TUS) Overlay LUD concept of the 2008 TLRMP. According to the 2016 TLRMP, the Standards and Guidelines for TSCs are management prescriptions that take precedence within any LUD where a TSC has been identified (either an existing major transportation development, or one proposed). Note: In awareness and anticipation of the Juneau Access Improvements (JAI) Project, the 2008 TLRMP, which was referenced in the JAI 2014 Draft SEIS, and its predecessor, the 1997 TLMP, which is referenced in the 2006 Final EIS, designated the two possible road corridors (one on the east side and one on the west side of Lynn Canal) as TUS LUDs (USFS, 2008b, p. 3-128). These corridors were formally granted to the State by law and are represented in the 2016 TLRMP Land Use Designations map as “State of Alaska ROW (PL 109-59) and Final Southeast Alaska Transportation Plan (2004).” As noted in Section 1.1 of this Final SEIS, the 2006 lawsuit against the JAI Project alleged the USFS violated the National Forest Management Act by approving a right-of-way (ROW) crossing designated old-growth habitat without determining that no feasible alternative existed. The lawsuit was based on TUS LUD and Old-Growth Habitat LUD Standards and Guidelines in the 2008 TLRMP. Detailed information is provided in the paragraphs below to clarify the purpose of old-growth habitat within the Tongass National Forest, which was an important element of the 2008 TLRMP and remains important in the 2016 TLRMP. These paragraphs clarify why no analysis regarding other feasible alternatives is required. The 2016 TLRMP preserves a large acreage of old-growth forest habitat by designation of Non- Development LUDs. These LUDs function as medium or large old-growth reserves (OGRs). Smaller amounts of old-growth forest habitat that meet specific criteria for size, spacing, and composition3 are preserved in the form of small reserves designated as Old-Growth Habitat LUDs. The Old-Growth Habitat LUD management prescription states that “new road construction is generally inconsistent with Old-Growth Habitat LUD objectives, but new roads may be constructed if no feasible alternative is available” (USFS, 2016a, p. 3-62). The prescription 3 Specific requirements are discussed in Appendix D to the 2016 TLRMP Final EIS (USFS, 2016b, p. D-8) and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ecological Subsections of Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve, Sitka National Historic Park, Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Park
    ECOLOGICAL SUBSECTIONS OF GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK & PRESERVE, SITKA NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK, KLONDIKE GOLD RUSH NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK Mapping and Delineation by: Gregory Nowacki, Michael Shephard, William Pawuk, Gary Fisher, James Baichtal, David Brew, Evert Kissinger and Terry Brock, USDA Forest Service Photographs by: USDA Forest Service Alaska Region Inventory and Monitoring Program 2525 Gambell Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Alaska Region Inventory & Monitoring Program 2525 Gambell Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 (907) 257-2488 Fax (907) 264-5428 Ecological Subsections of Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Park Sitka National Historic Park 2001 Excerpts from Ecological Subsections of Southeast Alaska and Neighboring Areas of Canada Gregory Nowacki, Michael Shephard, William Pawuk, Gary Fisher, James Baichtal, David Brew, Evert Kissinger and Terry Brock USDA Forest Service, Alaska Region Technical Publication R10-TP-75 October 2001 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ..............................................................................1 ECOLOGICAL SUBSECTION DELINEATION CRITERIA AND MAPPING..2 HIERARCHICAL ARRANGEMENT AND FINAL CORRECTION..................4 GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE ...................................1 Icefields...................................................................................................1 SAINT ELIAS—FAIRWEATHER .....................................................................1 Recently Deglaciated Areas .................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Ainealaska S
    VISITOR GUIDE HAINEAlaskA S VISITHAINES.COM WELCOME TO HAINES, ALASKA (Roaming River Photography) People all over the world travel to Haines, looking to experience what locals enjoy every day in our unique Alaskan town. Your adventure starts by deciding your mode of transportation and planning how to fit it all in. Nestled between North America’s deepest fjord and the Chilkat Range, get ready to embark on the “best-kept secret.” Explore Haines’ beautiful scenery, plentiful wildlife, cultural facilities and programs, and incredible outdoor recreation opportunities, and so much more! JOIN US! TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Getting to Haines 4 Golden Circle Tour 6 Haines History 8 Wildlife 10 Wild Things, Wild Places 14 Arts & Culture 16 Haines Map 18 Nearby Adventure Cover Photos Colors at Chilkoot Lake, Fishing 20 Accommodations Chilkoot (Tom Ganner) Skiing (Dawson Evenden) Totem Photo (Tom Ganner) 23 Local Listings Eagle (Tom Ganner) Back Cover: Picture Point Published July 2020 (Tom Ganner) Cape Prince Alfred BANKS I VICTORIA ISLAND Sachs Barrow Harbour Bay Wainwright Holman Cambridge Amundsen Beaufort Sea Cape Bathurst Gulf Prudhoe Bay Bering Strait Paulatuk Tuktoyaktuk 246 Kuguktuk Kotzebue Inuvik Selawik Aklavik 80 Seward Coldfoot Fort McPherson Gambell Bettles Old Crow Peninsula 35 Tsiigehtchic Great Nome ARCTIC CIRCLE Bear 116 Lake ST LAWRENCE 66.5˚ ISLAND Eagle Plains Fort Good Hope Yukon River Circle Livengood 231 Norman Wells Bering Sea Unalakleet Mackenzie River FAIRBANKS 5 Eagle YUKON Delta (CANADA) Hooper A L A S K A Junction Chicken
    [Show full text]
  • Haines Comprehensive Plan 2025 Downloadable
    HAINES BOROUGH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SEPTEMBER 2012 HAINES BOROUGH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN September 2012 Acknowledgements Planning and Zoning Commission Assembly Rob Goldberg, Chair Stephanie Scott, Mayor Andy Hedden Daymond Hoffman Don Turner III Debra Schnabel Roger Maynard Jerry Lapp Lee Heinmiller Joanne Waterman Robert Venables Norm Smith Danny Gonce Steve Vick Joanne Waterman, Assembly liaison Jan Hill (former mayor) Pete Lapham (former) Scott Rossman (former) Borough staff significantly contributed to this plan, they are: Project Manager: Mark Earnest, Borough Manager Al Badgley, Fireman Meredith Pochardt, Youth Development Coordinator Connie Staska, Admin Asst/Sales Tax Clerk Patricia Peters, Pool Manager Darsie Culbeck, Special Projects Patty Brown, Director, Public Library Dean Olsen, Assistant Assessor Phil Benner, Harbormaster Brian Lemcke, Director of Public Facilities Scott Bradford, Water/Sewer Plt Operator, Fire Chief Gary Lowe, Police Chief Steve Ritzinger, Planning Technician Jamie Heinz, Assistant Borough Clerk Tanya Carlson, Tourism Director Jerrie Clarke, Sheldon Museum Director Tina Olsen, Accounting Clerk Jila Stuart, Finance Director Former staff: Brad Maynard, Public Works Director; Julie Cozzi, Borough Clerk Ed Barrett, Harbormaster Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee members provided significant input and ran a public review of the draft maps, they are: Marnie Hartman, Chair Melany Zimmerman Daymond Hoffman, Assembly liaison Jennifer Talley Darsie Culbeck Logan Simpson Jessica Kayser Ron Jackson Others who provided information and assistance Over 100 residents attended one or more Community Meetings or work sessions or sent in comments. About 120 joined the project mailing list to track the process. This plan could not have been prepared without the information you provided. The 208 Haines households polled in the Community Opinion Survey also provided valuable information that supported this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Haines Coastal Management Plan - 2007 Ii Haines Coastal Management Plan - 2007 Iii Acknowledgements
    Haines Coastal Management Program Final Plan Amendment With Assistance from Sheinberg Associates Juneau, Alaska Haines Coastal Management Plan - 2007 ii Haines Coastal Management Plan - 2007 iii Acknowledgements This plan revision and update would not have been possible without the help of many people who gave their time and expertise. Most important were the Haines Coastal District Coordinator Scott Hansen, who produced maps and provided support for meetings and guidance, Borough Manager Robert Venables, and the Haines Borough Planning Commission: Jim Stanford, Chair Harriet Brouillette Bob Cameron Rob Goldberg Lee Heinmiller Bill Stacy Lynda Walker The Haines Borough Mayor and Assembly also contributed to the development of this Plan. They were: Mike Case, Mayor Jerry Lapp, Deputy Mayor Scott Rossman Stephanie Scott Debra Schnabel Norman Smith Herb VanCleve Others who assisted in the development of this plan by providing information or by following its development include local groups such as the Takshanuk Watershed Council and Chilkat Indian Association. State and Federal staff were helpful in their review and comments on resource inventory and analysis and policy development. Gina Shirey-Potts, OPMP was especially attentive and helpful as were Patty Craw, DGGS-ADNR; Joan Dale, SHPO-ADNR; Mike Turek, ADFG; Roy Josephson, Forestry and Roselynn Smith, ADNR. My apologies to anyone inadvertently left off the acknowledgements. Frankie Pillifant, Sheinberg Associates. Haines Coastal Management Plan - 2007 iv Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A, Index Map of the St. Elias Mountains of Alaska and Canada Showing the Glacierized Areas (Index Map Modi- Fied from Field, 1975A)
    Figure 100.—A, Index map of the St. Elias Mountains of Alaska and Canada showing the glacierized areas (index map modi- fied from Field, 1975a). B, Enlargement of NOAA Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) image mosaic of the St. Elias Mountains in summer 1995. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration image from Mike Fleming, USGS, EROS Data Center, Alaska Science Center, Anchorage, Alaska. K122 SATELLITE IMAGE ATLAS OF GLACIERS OF THE WORLD St. Elias Mountains Introduction Much of the St. Elias Mountains, a 750×180-km mountain system, strad- dles the Alaskan-Canadian border, paralleling the coastline of the northern Gulf of Alaska; about two-thirds of the mountain system is located within Alaska (figs. 1, 100). In both Alaska and Canada, this complex system of mountain ranges along their common border is sometimes referred to as the Icefield Ranges. In Canada, the Icefield Ranges extend from the Province of British Columbia into the Yukon Territory. The Alaskan St. Elias Mountains extend northwest from Lynn Canal, Chilkat Inlet, and Chilkat River on the east; to Cross Sound and Icy Strait on the southeast; to the divide between Waxell Ridge and Barkley Ridge and the western end of the Robinson Moun- tains on the southwest; to Juniper Island, the central Bagley Icefield, the eastern wall of the valley of Tana Glacier, and Tana River on the west; and to Chitistone River and White River on the north and northwest. The boundar- ies presented here are different from Orth’s (1967) description. Several of Orth’s descriptions of the limits of adjacent features and the descriptions of the St.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Natural Heritage Program National Park Service Alaska
    GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT Matthew L. Carlson, Keith Boggs, Robert Lipkin, & Julie A. Michaelson Alaska Natural Heritage Program Environment and Natural Resources Institute University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 National Park Service Alaska Region Inventory & Monitoring Program NPS Report : April 2004 Cooperative Agreement No. 1443CA991000013 Funding Source: National Park Service, Inventory & Monitoring Program 1 GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY ABSTRACT In 2001 and 2003 the Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP) conducted vascular plant field inventories in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve in accordance with a cooperative agreement with the National Park Service. The primary goal was to document greater than 90% of the vascular plant species expected to occur within the park and significantly improve our understanding of current species distributions. The inventory targeted diverse habitat types and poorly-sampled areas. The AKNHP staff visited eight diverse ecogeographic regions and sampled intensively within these regions from late June to mid-August, 2001 and late June to early July in 2003. A total of 555 specimens were collected, recorded, pressed, and curated. Of the 333 individual taxa, 172 are new records for the park and an additional 44 represent verifications of previously unverified reports. A number of finds were significant range extensions or taxa of conservation concern. Collections were made of four globally restricted species: Botrychium ascendens (G2G3-S2 AKNHP rank), Platanthera chorisiana (G3-S3), Eleocharis kamtschatica (G4-S2S3), and Salix setchelliana (G4-S3). A number of collections were made of species which are very rare in Alaska, but more widespread in western North America, such as Agoseris aurantiaca, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory and Cataloging of the Sport Fish Waters in Southeast Alaska
    Volume 14 Study No. G-I Job No. G-I-A STATE OF ALASKA WilliamA. Egan, Governor Annual Progress Report for Inventory and Cataloying of the Sport Fish and Sport Fish Waters in Southeast Alaska by Artwin Schmidt, Stuart Robards, and Michael McHugh ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME James W. Brooks, Commissioner DIVISION OF SPORT FISH Rupert E. Andrews, Director Howard E. Metsker, Coordinator IN MEMORIAM l\1ike McHugh was born in Port Angeles, Washington, on September 24, 1935. He graduated from Columbia High School in Richland, Washington, in 1953. In Aug­ ust of 1953, he entered the U. S. Air Force where he served until 1957 , when he re­ ceived an honorable discharge. From 1957 to 1962, Mike attended Riverside College, and Humboldt State College in California, receiving his Bachelor of Arts in zoology from the latter. He was employed by the If. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, as a Fish­ ery Biologist at LUdington, Michigan, from 1962 to 1964, where he was engaged in the lamprey control program . Mike joined the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in June, 1964, as a Fishery Biologist, with the Commer­ cial Fisheries Division. Mike first served as Assistant Area Management Biologist, then transferred to pink salmon research. In September, 1969, he transferred to the Sport Fish Division, where he was appointed Upper Southeast Area Management Biologist. He served in this position until his death on July 29, 1973. Mike was a member of the American Institute of Fishery Research Biologists, the American Fisheries Society, and member and founder of the Juneau Rifle and Pistol Club.
    [Show full text]
  • Lynn Canal Wind and Wave Climatology Study for Vessel Operations
    Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Juneau Access Improvements SEIS Lynn Canal Wind and Wave Climatology Study for Vessel Operations Prepared for HDR Alaska, Inc. Anchorage, Alaska File No. 11163.03 4 June 2013 Rev. B Consulting Engineers Serving the Marine Community Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Juneau Access Improvements SEIS Lynn Canal Wind and Wave Climatology Study for Vessel Operations Prepared for HDR Alaska, Inc. Anchorage, Alaska File No. 11163.03 4 June 2013 Rev. B PREPARED: Katherine V. Sultani-Wright, PE Project Engineer CHECKED: Thomas Mathai, PhD Project Manager APPROVED: David W. Larsen, PE Principal-in-Charge Consulting Engineers Serving the Marine Community 1201 Western Avenue, Suite 200, Seattle, Washington 98101-2921 TEL 206.624.7850 FAX 206.682.9117 www.glosten.com Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 1 Section 1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 2 Section 2 Wind Climatology ................................................................................... 3 2.1 Eldred Rock, Alaska ..................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Skagway, Alaska .......................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Point Retreat, Alaska ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chart 5-25 Haines Event Visitors, 2008-2011
    Despite receiving few cruise ships in port, Haines benefits from the Skagway cruise ship port of call because Haines businesses and the HCVB worked to develop opportunities for cruise passengers to visit Haines during their stay in Skagway. In 2011, approximately 28,500 cruise ship passengers visited Haines via fast day ferry between Skagway and Haines to do day excursions in Haines. These visitors spent an average of $135 per person in Haines during their stay in 2011, or $3.8 million (2011 Haines Cruise and Fast Ferry Passenger Survey, McDowell Group). Dependable fast day boat runs between these communities is essential to capture this business. The Haines Borough’s Convention and Visitor Bureau has partnered with community organizations and businesses to actively create destination events and market them. The Haines Chamber of Commerce’s annual events calendar lists a number of activities that attract nearly 15,000 independent visitors annually (Chart 5-25). The largest of these is the multi-day Southeast Alaska State Fair that features live music, food, arts and crafts, farm animals, and amusement rides. In 2011, this event attracted 11,500 people. The next largest event is the 148 mile Kluane Chilkat International Bike Race in June, popular with local, Juneau and Whitehorse residents. Chart 5-25 Haines Event Visitors, 2008-2011 15,000 12,500 10,000 7,500 5,000 2,500 - 2008 2009 2010 2011 SE Fair Spring Fling 187 187 187 187 Eagle Festival 271 266 Alaska Brew Fest 665 683 953 1,009 Kluane Bike Race 1,200 1,041 1,282 1,223 SE State Fair 10,000 10,000 11,000 11,500 HAINES BOROUGH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / September 2012 page 92 The opportunities for recreation related tourism are deep in the community with access to so many varied outdoor settings.
    [Show full text]
  • Mountain Goat Populations (Smith I 984 )
    STATE OF ALASKA Tony Knowles, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Frank Rue, Commissioner DIVISION OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION Wayne L. Regelin, Director Persons intending to cite this material should receive permission from the author(s) and/or the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Because most reports deal with preliminary results of continuing studies, conclusions are tentative and should be identified as such. Please give authors credit. Free copies of this report and other Division of Wildlife Conservation publications are available to the public. Please direct requests to our publications specialist: Mary Hicks Publications Specialist ADF&G, Wildlife Conservation P.O. Box 25526 Juneau, AK 99802 (907) 465-4190 The Alaska Department of Fish and Game administers all programs and activities free from discrimination on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, or disability. The department administers all programs and activities in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title Il of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the· Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire further information please write to ADF&G, P.O. Box 25526, Juneau, AK 99802-5526; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4040 N. Fairfield Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22203 or O.E.O., U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington DC 20240. For information on alternative formats for this and other department publications, please contact the department ADA Coordinator at (voice) 907­ 465-4120, (TDD) 907-465-3646, or (FAX) 907-465-2440.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conservation Assessment for the Coastal Forests and Mountains Ecoregion of Southeastern Alaska and the Tongass National Forest
    A Conservation Assessment for the Coastal Forests and Mountains Ecoregion of Southeastern Alaska and the Tongass National Forest David Albert and John Schoen Southeastern Alaska (Southeast) encompasses one of ● Develop detailed geographic information system the most significant areas of old-growth temperate (GIS) databases for selected (focal) resources; rainforest in the world. Much of this region also ● Assess the current condition and management comprises a unique assemblage of intact coastal status of focal species and ecological systems; watersheds that support abundant populations of fish ● Develop a process for ranking the ecological and wildlife, including many species that have declined value of watersheds within biogeographic provinces or become threatened in the southern portion of their throughout Southeast; historical ranges (for example, Pacific salmon ● Summarize ecological values of all watersheds for [Oncorhynchus spp.], brown bear [Ursus arctos], and focal species and ecological systems (watershed marbled murrelet [Brachyramphus marmoratus]). matrix); A comprehensive understanding of the diversity, ● Develop a geospatial decision support tool for distribution, abundance, and management of terrestrial conservation planning throughout Southeast and the and aquatic ecosystems in Southeast is critically Tongass; and important for maintaining ecological integrity and ● Develop a conservation area design for the biodiversity throughout this ecoregion. As an example, Tongass National Forest and southeastern Alaska. flood plain
    [Show full text]
  • Juneau Access Improvements Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    APPENDIX P ANADROMOUS AND RESIDENT FISH STREAMS TECHNICAL REPORT JUNEAU ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT STATE PROJECT NUMBER: 71100 FEDERAL PROJECT NUMBER: STP-000S (131) Prepared for Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities 6860 Glacier Highway Juneau, Alaska 99801-7999 Prepared by URS Corporation 8411 Airport Boulevard OCTOBER 2004 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Errata Sheet Anadromous and Resident Fish Streams Technical Report October 2004 1 Page 4-1, Section 4.2, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence correction: “Three of the anadromous rivers, the Antler, Berners/Lace, and Katzehin rivers, would require multi-span bridges with in stream piers.” 2. Page 4-3, Section. 4.3, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence correction: "As with Alternative 2, the Katzehin River would require a multi-span bridge with in-stream piers, and the remaining four anadromous streams would be crossed with single-span bridges with no in-stream piers.” 3. Page 4-4, Sec. 4.6, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence correction: “Alternative 3 would cross 10 streams on the west side and one stream on the east side.” 4. Page 4-7, Table 4-2, West Lynn Canal Stream Crossings by Structure. Correction to 1st column, 4th row: “4W, 4AW, 14W, 15W, 19W (Ludaseska Creek).” 4. Figure 3-1, title correction: “Streams in the Project Area”. 5. Figure 3-1, stream 51E name correction: “Dayebas Creek”. Note: DOT&PF has committed to crossing anadromous streams less than 50 feet in width with a single span above the creek, resulting in no in-stream piers. For multi-span bridges, the approximate pier spacing would be 130 feet.
    [Show full text]