SUSI,.IIA AREA PLAII RECREATION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT OF RECREATION LANDS IN· THE SUSITNA AREA
PREPARED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES: DIVISIONS OF PARKS AND OUTDOOR RECREATION AND LAND AND WATER MANAGEMENT WITH ASSISTANCE FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE JULY 1984
:: HT - 393 .A42 i~ 59433 Vj~ 1984
AI. .. J, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES • 555 CORDOVA ST.· ANCHORAGE, AK. 99510 SUSITNA AREA PLAN RECREATION ELEMENT .
Chapter I INTRODUCTION. •••• •.• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• . 1
Chapter II EXISTING USE, VALUE AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES.... 3
Chapter III DEMAND ••••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••0. .••••••... 15
Chapter IV SUPPLY OF LAND (RESOURCE BASE) •••••••••••••••• 19
Chapter V SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALySIS •••••••••••••••••••••••• 27
Chapter VI MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS •••••••••••••••••••• 33
Appendix A SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION FOR THE GLENN HIGHWAY •••• e._ •••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ •••••••• 55
i I [
LIST OF 'l'ABLES ' I
Table 2.1 Standards for Selected Recreation Activities ••••••••• 6 f Table 2.2' Existing Recreation Value...... 7
Table 2.3 Existing Recreation Demand.~...... 10
Table 3.1 Projected Recreation Demand for the Year 2000...... 17
Table 3.2 Projected Recreation Value for the Year 2000...... 18
LIST OF MAPS
Map 1 Susitna Area Land Management Recommendations for Recreation...... following
I l ii I L CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND
The Susitna area contains a wide variety of recreational resources" that provide exceptional opportunities for the public asa result of proximity to population centers and accessibility by means of the Parks, Glenn and Denali highways. The region receives heavy use from a variety of people including both state and local residents and a large number of tourists from outside of Alaska.
Tourism, as an income generating industry, is second only to oil and gas in the state and is an important part of the economy of the study area. In 1977 , more than 500,000 people spent nearly 370 million dollars traveling to, from, and within Alaska. 1 Over 75 percent of those visitors entered the state partly for pleasure, e.g. sightseeing, camping, hiking, fishing, and so forth, and 55 percent came solely for this purpose. The most frequently visited places in the state by non-residents included Anchorage (358,300 visitors), Fairbanks (174,000 visitors), and Denali National Park (120,200 visitors). A large number of visitors pass through the study area en route to special interest areas such as Denali and Fairbanks. The prospects for increased recreational use of the study area are great, especially as increased access opens up currently remote regions.
Although there are presently large amounts of public land available for recreational use, changes in land ownership and development are expected to alter the area's traditional recreational land base. As pressure to develop land for other uses continues to grow, land use conflicts will occur. It is these conflicts that represent the major issue in the region - growing populations in the borough and Anchorage both increase the need for recreation lands and decrease (through development) the land base from which that need can be met.
The element presented here will examine this issue as it relates to recreation resources; scenic and heritage resources; and unique natural features.
B. FUNCTION OF THE ELEMENT
The recreation element is designed to provide an overall view of the supply of, demand for and value of recreational resources in the Susitna study area. The element also constitutes an advocacy statement by the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation (DPOR) indicating how they would prefer recreation resources to be managed in the study area. These management recommendations, together with related information about other resources, will be used to formulate land allocations and management guidelines for public land in the study area.
1Susitna River Basin Study-Alaska, Willow Subbasin, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1981.
1 {
C. ORGANIZATION/CONTENTS
This report contains six chapters. The introduction (this chapter) states the purpose of the report and. how it relates to the overall planning process. Chapter II describes historical and existing recreational activity and the economic significance of this activity to both local and other state residents. In addition, a discussion of the major management issues pertaining to recreational use is included. Chapter III addresses future (year 2000) demand for recreational opportunities from local, regional and national perspectives, and provides an estimate of the land necessary to accommodate this demand. The fourth chapter describes the current supply of recreational resources within the study area in terms of available recreational land and facilities. This information is presented in graphic (mapped) as well as narrative form. Chapter V draws on information from the previous 2 chapters and from the economic assessment presented in this chapter to reach conclusions concerning the desirability and feasibility of meeting recreation demand. These conclusions serve as the basis for near and long term management recommendations. Chapter r VI is a summary of these recommendations in terms of recreation goals L and objectives, management guidelines and programs. f I
L
ti I L 2 CHAPTER II
EXISTING USE t VALUE t AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES
A. INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses historical and existing recreational use and the value of that use in the study area. It also identifies management issues that are of maj or importance and will be addressed in terms of policies and guidelines in the planning process.
The description of existing use is based on data compiled by the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture t Soil Conservation Service (SCS). The Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation (DPOR) in conjunction with the SCS conducted a recreation study. designed to estimate the amount of . recreational use occurring in the study area as well as the economic value of that use to participants. The SCS used participation rates based on a statewide DPOR public· outdoor recreation survey in which people were asked how many times per year they participated in various activities. These rates are set forth in the· 1981 Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan. This survey has general information on the average number of "occasions". each adult participates in certain recreational activities. "Occasions t " when translated into user dayst provide an estimate of the total user days per year spent by residents in the study area. The information is a function of distance between the participants' homes and the location of the activity. .Information on the particular sites where residents are recreating is not available. Consequently, the resulting figures are regionaJ estimates and are not the equivalent of tallying up the actual number of picnickers at a particular site on the Glenn Highway. For example, estimates provided by DPOR indicate that the typical adult resident of the region spends 5 days per year cross-country skiingt most of which occurs within four driving hours from the person's residence.
Using the participation rates provided by DPOR, the SCS prepared a demand assessment and economic evaluation of the following seven recreational activities in the Susitna study area: picnicking, tent camping, recreational vehicle (RV) camping, hiking with a pack, ctoss-country skiing, snowmobilingt and canoeingjkayaking.
Although . these activities represent only a small portion of those available to Alaskans, they are among the most common and account for a large percentage of use in terms of total visitor days. It is important to note that by limiting the evaluation to only seven activities, the total value of recreation benefits attributable to a particular site or area cannot be derived from the analysis.
Tl1e remainder of this cha.pter contains information generated on the existing level of use (usetdays) and economic significance of that use. Additional background on the methodology used is provided in section C of this chapter. Figures for projected future demand for these 7 recreational activities can be found in Chapter III.
3 In addition to the above activities, hunting (big game, small game and waterfowl) and fishing were examined; these activities are discussed as part, of the fish and wildlife element.
B. HISTORICAL USE
The Susitna study. area is one with dramatic contrasts in terrain and climate, encompassing elements of both interior and coastal Alaska. Rugged mountains and glaciers can be found adjacent to gently sloping, wooded valleys and areas with heavy precipitation occur near dry, rain-shadowed valleys.
Recreational resources in the Susitna study area are as abundant and varied as anywhere in the state. Human use of these resources has traditionally been concentrated along the major road systems and at popular fly-in areas. Road accessible areas are especially important for picnicking and RV camping. Waterways, particularly clearwater r rivers in proximity to existing roads, have significant value for L fishing and boating. The many mountainous areas adjacent to transportation corridors also provide excellent opportunities for r hiking, climbing, hunting, wildlife viewing and other activities. l Historical factors have contributed .to the current pattern of recreational use in the study area. In the early 1900s, the southern Talkeetna Mountains were extensively explored for precious metals and later several other areas were actively mined for gold and silver. This nrlning activity provided the impetus for the extensive trail system existing today. These historie transportation corridors, for example, the Chickaloon-Nelchina Trail system, are now used for a wide L range of recreation activities, including hiking, ski touring, mountaineering, and hunting.
Recreational use also has been influenced by the agricultural development in the area. Most of this development historically took the form of either dispersed homesteads or the "Matanuska Colony," a federally sponsored project initiated in 1935. This project promoted agricultural development throughout the lowlands along the Matanuska and Knik Rivers while Wasilla, Knik and many other areas were staked as homesteads. The ultimate effect of this development on recreation has been to open areas to residential development, which in turn has increased recreational demand especially for intensive, short term activities.
The potential for increased recreational use of the study area is immense. If access improves, recreational opportunities will be made available in some of the currently remote regions and use may disperse from present concentrations along the major roads.
I L 4 C. EXISTING USE
Recreational Use and Facilities
Recreational use (and opportunities) can be discussed in terms of two categories - use associated with the road system, and use that depends on remote, less developed areas.
The majority of the study area is remote and without road access. As a result, those areas reachable by roads, particularly by the Parks and Glenn highways, are extremely important. These routes provide easy access to a variety of surrounding recreational opportunities and, in addition, offer exceptional views of the nearby landscapes. In the following discussion, the terms Parks Highway and Glenn Highway generally refer to those areas accessed by these highways. The Parks Highway region includes Petersville Road, Talkeetna Spur and other secondary roads in the area. The Glenn Highway is the major access route to the south side of the Talkeetna Mountains and the Lake Louise area (including the Lake Louise Road). The north side of the Chugach Mountains is largely inaccessible. The Denali Highway generally is discussed under road accessible areas or as part of the Talkeetna Mountains Subregion.
Short duration activities such as picnicking, RV or tent camping, berry-picking, boating, and fishing are extremely popular along the highway corridors. These are activities which generally require a small but developed land base, e.g., provisions for parking, picnic tables, camp sites, etc. These are also the activities for which there is the largest existing ,gap between demand and supply. Table 2.1 presents existing recreation use by residents and non-residents based on information provided by DPOR and the SCS. Use figures were divided for the Parks and Glenn Highways by assuming that an equal number of people, from Anchorage for example, would go south to the Kenai Peninsula, north along the Parks Highway and east along the Glenn Highway. (See the following section on Economic Significance for a further discussion of the methodology used.)
Also shown on the table are estimates of the facilities, (e.g., trail miles, camping sites) needed to accommodate these activities. This assessment of the resources necessary to provide quality recreational experiences has been done basin-wide. The need for recreational resources or facilities -- e.g., miles of cross-country ski trails or number of camp sites was derived from DPOR's Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan (1976-198.0, and 1970) and standards for quality recreational experiences. The recreation standards were developed specifically for Alaska bY' DPOR and are listed in Table 2.2. The product of total participation and the standard for each activity is
5 Table 2.1
Existing Recreation Demand l/ . Susitna Planning Area Excluding Willow Subbasin
User Day Demand Facility Demand (Peak Day)
Activity Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Facility Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Sector Sector Units Sector Sector
Kayaking/Canoeing 36,112 34,412 70,524 stream miles 45.2 43.0 88.2 Cross-Country Skiing 30,257 69,328 99,585 trail miles 28.1 64.5 92.6 Snowmobiling 29,602 65,739 95,341 trail miles 18.5 41.0 59.5 Hiking 37,644 37,069 74,713 trail miles 31.4 30.9 62.3 Picnicking 174,233 202.754 376,987 sites 232 270 502 RV Camping 75,305 44,759 120,064 sites 522 310 832 Tent Camping 56,238 51,133 107,371 sites 234 213 447
1/ Includes demand for recreation by residents and non-residents based on per capita participation rates
"- Table 2.2
Standards for selected recreation activities
% of 1./ % of }j Composite total total Facilities J.j factor demand demand required (facilities occurring requiring per demand required per Activity on peak day facilities day user day)4/
Kayaking/Canoeing 2.5 75 .0667 mi .001251 Cross-Country Skiing 1.55 90 .0667 mi .000930 Snowmobiling 1.04 90 .0667 mi .000624 Hiking 2.5 50 .0667 mi .000834 Picnicking 1.88 52 .136 units .001330 RV Camping 2.5 100 .277 units .006925 Tent Camping 2.5 ]j 50 1:./ .333 units 'i/ .004163
_~/ Derived from Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan (1976-1980 and 1970), Alaska Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation
!/ Assumed to be same as hiking
}j Estimated by SCS as follows: 3 persons/site 1/3 = .333 sites/person
:~/ The product of the percent of total demand occurring on peak day, the percent of total demand requiring facilities, and the facility requirements per demand day equals total facilities required the current need for recreational lands and resources. Of the activities surveyed by the SCS, RV and tent tamping and picnicking are the most popular and use the most developed facilities. There .was a total of 604,422 user days in 1982 for these 3 activities along the Parks and Glenn Highways.
Other activities, for example boating, . swimming, etc., not examined by the SCS often require some facilities but not as many as for the previously mentioned activities. In some cases DOT maintained pullouts along the roadsides help to meet the demand for parking areas. This is particularly true along the Glenn Highway where these pullouts are most numerous (12 total).
Certain types of recreation which are more dispersed and utilize a larger land base still need some support facilities. Activities in this category (for which there is generally an abundant land base; but few existing facilities) include hiking, cross-country skiing and snowmobiling. User days for these activities within the study area totalled 269,639 in 1982 (see Table 2.1). { .. j Water based activities are also quite popu~ar in the Susitna area. For I. canoeing/kayaking there were 70,524 user days expended in 1982. ,r. Public recreation cabins are a concept that deserve further L. investigation and implementtion at least on a trial basis. A state public use cabin program could be fashioned after the popular USFWS system. Public use cabins would encourage greater use of remote areas and also would decrease the demand for private recreation property.
Either the state, federal Or local government or local non profit organizations would construct and maintain the facilities. Cabins would be managed by DNR - either DPOR or DLWM. This would include a reservations and fee collection system. Ideal locations include the river corridors recommended for inclusion in the state park system, r other river corridors, along the Chickaloon Trail and Talkeetna Mountains. Site specific recommendations are made in Chapter 6.
Economic Significance of Existing Recreational Use
Many of the recreational activities examined for this study contribute significantly to the local and regional economy. The work done by SCS includes an analysis of the economic value of recreational activities. This analysis is used in 2 ways -- the first is to evaluate and measure the value associated with existing and potential recreational use and to quantify the benefits of recreational activities. The second is to measure the relative costs and benefits of different land use alternatives by providing a sense of the likely magnitude of values associated with various resource uses. I L I 8 L L Recreation values were estimated using the travel cost method (TCM) in conjunction with areawide participation rate information provided by DPOR. The travel cost method assumes that the value of a recreational activity is equal to the sum of the round-trip travel costs incurred by participants in gaining access to recreation sites. For state residents travel costs used in this study include only variable costs (gasoline and oil) for auto-truck travel, and variable and fixed (includes insurance, licensing, etc.) costs for RV travel for most activities. Other costs, such as lodging and purchase or rental of gear, were not included for any activities for residents. For non-residents, the following costs were included: transportation to and from Alaska, transportation rental while in Alaska, and hotel rates based on an average length of stay and adjusted for those activities where little formal lodging is required.
The basic premise of the travel cost method is that per capita use of a recreation site will decrease as out-of-pocket and time costs of traveling to the site increase, other variables being constant. The TCM consists of deriving a demand curve by using the variable costs of travel and the value of time as proxies for price.
Travel costs were estimated from selected demand centers including Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Wasilla (for all demand in the Mat-Su Borough). Costs were estimated 'for concentric one-hour (45 mile) travel zones surrounding each demand center. It is important to remember that travel costs were based on auto access only and do not include any additional costs (e.g., boat, ATV, plane) required to reach recreational areas. The average per capita travel costs for each one-hour zone were multiplied by the number of miles traveled and the number of user days in each activity to determine the total value of recreation for each activity in eaCh zone.
Dollar values for the seven activities considered are presented in Table 2.3. Dollar figures are broken down by geographic region (Parks and Glenn Highways) and by residents and non-residents. The total estimated annual value to residents and non-residents for the recreation activities investigated is estimated to be $20,368,000. As stated above, this figure represents average annual variable (and fixed for RV travel) expenditures for travel to and from recreation sites in the study area.
Further information on participation rates, values per user day and other background data is available from the SCS or DNR, Resource Allocation Section.
The value estimates produced should be considered partial only and at best represent a minimum value for recreation resources. As noted previously, not all expenses are included in this method, and only seven activities are considered.
9 Table 2.3
Existing Recreation Value Susitna Planning Area Excluding Willow Subbasin (1982 Dollars)
Recreation Value to Residents Recreation Value to Non-Residents
Total Total Activity Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Annual Present Sector Sector Sector Sector Value Value.!.!
Kay akingjCanoE~ing 1,034,050 648,570 1,682,620 73,504 70,035 143,539 1,826,159 18,106,000 Cross-Country Skiing 400,310 496,990 897,300 59,373 136,099 195,472 1,092,772 10,834,600 Snowmobiling 1,112,874 1,845,488' 2,958,362 73,003 162,044 235,047 3,193,409 31,662,000 Hiking 362,600 226,180 588,780 62,900 61,925 124,825 713,605 7,075,300 Picnicking 2,087,560 1,608,580 3,696,140 1,412,043 1,643,180 3,055,223 6,751,363 66,938,500 R.V. Camping 460,850 216,090 676,940 2,915,931 1,733,150 4,649,081 5,326,021 52,806,500 Tent Camping 529,610 307,930 837,540 328,462 298,616 627,078 1,464,618 14,521,400
1./ Based on ~)O year evaluation period, 10% discount rate
-'-1 - --, Total recreation value for each activity is a basinwide aggregate figure only. Under present conditions, most activity is concentrated within close proximity to the existing road network indicating that ~ disproportionate share of economic values is located in these areas. By the same token, providing additional access would lead to a probable shift in demand toward now remote locations thereby raising the dollar value of these areas.
Economic Significance of Potential Use
The potential value of areas that are presently remote but which might become more valuable with access proposed under the Susitna Area Plan is difficult to estimate. One way to estimate potential use and value is by comparison with presently accessible sites of similar quality. This method presumes, however, that there is no limit on the amount of recreation demand and that the amount of use will not change from that occurring on existing sites. It seems likely, however, that use will increase since expansion of the supply of recreation opportunities will probably increase the quality of the recreation experience. This in turn will lead to some degree of greater total use, especially for the first few such recreation opportunities added. Further discussion of the potential value of presently remote or undeveloped areas is presented in Chapter III.
Several limitations of the recreation analysis should be acknowledged and understood at this point. Major limitations are as follows:
1. Recreation values - all values are based on standard road vehicle (auto, pickup truck, recreation camper) costs. Costs of getting from the road to the activity site are not included and, in some cases, such as where motorized boats, ATV's, and float planes are used, these costs could be substantial.
2. Activities - Only seven activities are evaluated and although they account for a large portion of the study are~'s total use, exactly how large is only a guess without bett~'r data than now exists. This, in effect, means that total values developed for this analysis are not really totals at all, but rather partial.
3. Social benefits - There are certain other aspects of recreation that have value but are impossible to measure. These include values placed on land preservation by many who have not, nor ever will, set foot in Alaska (option demand), e.g., people who contribute time and money to the many environmentally oriented organizations throughout the country which consider preservation of Alaska land in its natural state a major objective. These values are also lacking in the analyses, just as similar considerations are lacking in the agricultural and timber analyses.
4. Trade off considerations - In addition to the previously listed limitations one final caveat is in order - net benefits from recreation are not directly comparable to' those from agriculture and timber production. Recreation values developed for this analysis are substantially understated.
11 D. MANAGEMENT ISSUES
The following issues related to recreation have emerged from public meetings and staff analysis. They are concerns which must be addressed through the planning process. It is necessary to identify and understand these issues before defining goals and objectives for management of recreational resources.
1. Recreational Land Base
a. Conflicts with Other Resource Values
The Susitna basin likely will experience substantial growth and resource development· in the near future. If developed, several proposed projects (Susitna Dam, Beluga coal, and the Knik Arm Crossing) could influence heavily the pace of this growth. Pressures to use existing and potential recreation land for other uses also will continue to increase. f Land with high public recreation value is often desirable for ( residential use. It also may be excellent agricultural land, forest land, important habitat or a mineralized area. Competition among these resources will be a major land management issue. Two specific problem areas are: i. River Corridors and Lake Fronts: settlement values in these areas are very high. The sale of large amounts of public land for settlement may conflict with important recreation values. Demand for land for private use tends to focus on land adjacent to lakes, streams, and good hunting - the kind of land that has important public recreation values.
iie Talkeetna Mountains: Conflicts between mining and recreation may emerge as a central issue in portions of the study area, especially in the Talkeetna Mountains. Management guidelines will be necessary to minimize these conflicts.
b. Need for a Land Base near Population Centers and Along Major I Highway Corridors (
A considerable amount of outdoor recreation activity occurs on lands which are not within the State Park System nor other public use areas. Many of these lands, especially those near major population centers and along the highway system, are becoming unavailable for public recreation as a result of incompatible developments and the conveyances of public lands to private ownership.
I ! I. 12 2. Access
In accessible areas, the combination of heavy use and limited facilities creates congestion, reduces user satisfaction, and causes management problems. This is a special problem during salmon fishing season where few road accessible areas exist to accommodate many users.
A second important access related issue involves ownership.· Many recreational activities in the basin, especially hunting and fishing, occur on or across private lands. Increased development onprivate lands as well as pressure to dispose of public lands can reduce public recreational opportunities and create trespass problems.
As additional public lands are sold for private use, methods of protecting public access across these lands to important recreation areas will be an important issue. Use of building setbacks, buffers, retention of public land and other methods will be required to maintain opportunities for public recreational use of these areas.
3. Appropriate Roles of Various Land Owners in Supplying Recreational Opportunities
Policies and actions of mariy public agencies and private land owners affect outdoor recreational opportunities. The state, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, the federal government, and private landowners all manage land with the potential to prOVide recreational opportunities. For optimum management it is important to assess the management role and type of recreational opportunities each owner best can make available to the public based on location and quality of the resource.
Many agencies, whether or not they are in the recreation business, make land use, facility design and other decisions which enhance or detract from outdoor recreation opportunities. Recreational opportunities can, and should, be provided in conjunction with other programs such as road construction, settlement, and community planning. For example, road construction provides opportunities for developing parking areas for trailheads, scenic pullouts, rock climbing areas, wildlife viewing opportunities, stream access and bicycle/pedestrian trails safely separated from motorized traffic.
4. Securing Funds to Support Development and Maintenance of Recreational Facilities
One of the major problems facing recreation managers today is the difficulty of obtaining legislative funding for the planning, construction, and maintenance of developed facilities. Regardless of the number of acres allocated to recreation through planning, the demand for certain developed activities will not be satisfied without sufficient funding to develop and then maintain recreational sites.
13 5. Recreational Needs of Small Communities
Although local governments are in the best position geographically and jurisdictionally to be sensitive to local recreation needs, they often lack the financial and technical resources to provide adequate recreation opportunities. While it is not feasible for DPOR to manage park units serving each of the communities in the study area, it it the responsibility of the Division to ensure that outdoor recreational needs of people statewide are met through technical and financial assistance.
6. Preserving and Protecting Heritage Resources
Prehistoric and historic sites in Alaska contribute to the state's distinctive identity. There is an on-going and sometimes urgent need for the state's heritage sites program to prevent needless destruction and neglect. Not every historical resource is worthy of preservation but an adequate representation of the diverse prehistoric and historic sites must be preserved so future generations will understand and value Alaska's rich heritage. [ !
f l
14 CHAPTER III
DEMAND
A. PURPOSE OF CHAPTER
This chapter discusses the projected level of demand for general recreation (not including hunting and fishing) in the Susitna Study Area. This chapter is divided into two main sections - the first addresses the projected demand for recreation opportunities and f acilities over the course of the planning period (20 years). The second portion describes the estimated facilities and land base needed to satisfy the anticipated demand.
B• PROJECTED DEMAND
Chapter II described existing (1982) recreational use in terms of user days, facilities required and the economic significance of this use to the local and regional economy. Detailed information provided by the SCS was presented for seven recreational activities. Figures for estimated future demand (the year 2000) based on the same participation rates and on population projections are displayed in Table 3.1. This table also shows projected facility requirements.
In this section, projected demand for general recreation in the study area is estimated for residents and tourists to Alaska. The future demand for recreation in the study area was estimated by approximating the total number of user days spent by Alaskans and non-residents recreating on state land. First the number of occasions residents and tourists in the area spent in certain types of rereational activities were estimated. These current levels of activity were then increased on a per capita basis to project the increase in demand for the year 2000.
The analysis assumes that residents in the future will have the same demand for general recreation per capita as they do today. As a result, no allowance is made for any changes in per capita participation rates which may increase or decrease as a result of changes in such things as transportation costs, disposable income, and amount of free time, etc. The degree to which the expansion of the supply of recreation opportunities will affect latent demand is also difficult to predict. For certain types of activities, such as road accessible stream fishing, there is tremendous demand, as is shown by the willingness of people to participate despite very crowded conditions. This high degree of participation suggests that per capita participation might increase if an increase in supply improved the quality. (reduced the crowding) of available fishing sites. However, the most visible effect of increased stream fishing opportunities would
15 likely be the transfer of existing users from presently crowded areas into new areas that offered a higher quality experience. For other recreation activities, such as snowmobiling or cross-country skiing, the available supply of lands is sufficiently large that participants can readily find uncrowded high quality areas. As a result, it is less likely that increases in the quality and quantity of this type of· activity area will result in a commensurate increase in per capita participation.
The final conclusion on this subject is admittedly speculative: it is that the expansion of the number of recreation opportunities will primarily result in an increase in the quality of the experience to typical users but not, with the exception of certain types of activities, significantly increase per capita participation rates. The increase in quality may result in significant transfer of use from lower quality (more crowded) recreation areas such as the Kenai into the Susitna study area. More empirical evidence should be gathered before this conclusion is used as the basis for any irreversible land use decisions. lI . The activities where per capita participation levels are most likely to grow are tent and RV camping - activities in which the availability of opportunities is the most constrained. For these activities the figures shown in Table 3.1 must be viewed as minimum estimates.
The greatest increase in total demand for activities requiring developed facilities is for picnicking and camping (RV and tent) along the Glenn Highway - projected demand is between 59% and 72% higher than 1982 use. On a typical weekend, Long Lake, King Mountain, Matanuska Glacier, and Moose Creek recreation sites frequently are at capacity. User day demand along the Parks Highway is anticipated to increase between 47% and 59%. Expected demand for the other four activities considered by SCS (kayaking/canoeing, cross-country skiing, snowmobiling and hiking) is also significantly higher for the Glenn Highway (between 72% and 100%) than for the Parks (53% to 78%).
The projected increase in user day demand will translate to a corresponding increase in economic value generated by recreational activities. Table 3.2 presents information prepared by the SCS on value to residents and non-residents. Total value to residents alone in the year 2000 for the seven activities studied is $18,267,500, only L $2 million less than 1982 value for residents and non-residents combined.
C. ESTIMATED LAND BASE/FACILITIES NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE DEMAND
In addition to projected user day demand, Table 3.1 shows peak day facility demands. Figures on the percentage of demand occurring on peak days for each activity were obtained from DPOR's 1970 Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan. A total of 832 sites would be needed for picnicking, 1260 for RV camping and 711 for tent camping to satisfy peak day demand. DPOR estimates that they generally aim to satisfy 75% of peak day demand when planning new facilities.
16 L.. n'.l
Table 3.1
Projected Recreation Demand 1/ for the Year 2000 Excluding Willow Subbasin
User Day Demand Facility Demand (Peak Day)
Activity Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Facility Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Sector Sector Units Sector Sector
Kayaking/Canoeing 55,216 59,021 114,237 Stream Miles 69.0 73.8 142.8 Cross-Country Skiing 52,820 135,540 188,360 Trail Miles 49.1 126.0 175.1 Snowmobiling 52,652 132,101 184,753 Trail Miles 32.8 82.4 115.2 ...... Hiking 58,550 64,935 123,485 Trail Miles 48.8 54.1 102.9 ...... Picnicking 277 ,089 348,748 625,837 Sites 368.5 463.8 832.3 RV Camping 110,715 71,235 181,950 Sites 766.7 493.3 1260.0 Tent Camping 84,543 86,359 170,902 Sites 351.9 359.5 711.4
1/ Includes Residents and Non-Residents Table 3.2
Projected Recreation Value for the Year 2000 Excluding Willow Subbasin
Recreation Value to Residents Recreation Value to Non-Residents
Total Activity Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Parks Hwy Glenn Hwy Total Annual Sector Sector Sector Sector Value
Kayaking/Canoeing 1,500,900 1,002,550 2,503,450 83,501 79,560 163,061 2,666,51 1 Cross-Country Skiing 636,450 841,880 1,478,330 67,448 154,608 222,056 1,700,386 1,889,963 3,589,985 5,479,948 82,931 184,082 267,013 5,746,961 ...... Snowmobiling 00 Hiking 541,920 359,590 901,510 71 ,454 70,347 141,801 1,U43,31 1 Picnicking 3,165,810 2,544,250 5,710,060 1,604,081 1,866,652 3,470,733 9,180,793 RV Camping 657,300 319,130 976,430 3,312,498 1,968,858 5,281,356 6,257,786 Tent Camping 751,340 466,400 1,217,740 373,133 339,228 712,361 1,930,801
TOTAL 9,143,623 9,123,785 18,267,468 5,595,046 4,663,335 10,258,381 28,525,849 CHAPTER IV
SUPPLY OF LAND (RESOURCE BASE)
A. PURPOSE OF CHAPTER
This chapter presents information on the supply of land for outdoor recreation in the study area. Addressing the supply of land for recreation in quantitative terms is not always possible. It is useful only when dealing with activities which require actual developed facilities, such as RV camping or alpine skiing. For this reason, the supply of land and facilities for recreation will be described both quantitatively and qualitatively. This section briefly addresses the general recreational qualities of land within the study area. The remainder of the chapter presents an inventory of existing use areas and facilities; with emphasis on the activities surveyed by the SCS (Section B). Fish and wildlife related activiti,es will be discussed only briefly here; the supply of land and demand for these activities are described in more detail in the fish and wildlife element. The supply of recreation land for selected activities other than those mentioned above, including scenic, heritage, and wilderness resources, and unique natural features will be briefly discussed in Section C.
The vast majority of the study area is capable of supporting some form of recreational use, whether it be mountain climbing or moose hunting. For much of the land base, however, the degree of existing and future use is determined primarily by access considerations. (Refer to Chapter II for a more detailed overview of recreational attributes within the study area. )
B. EXISTING USE AREAS AND FACILITIES
Given the fact that most of the region can support some recreational activity, access patterns determine which areas support the largest percentage of recreational use. The remainder of this section describes existing use areas and facilities by the categories outlined in Section A above.
1. Recreational Vehicle (RV) Camping
Land suitable for RV camping is obviously associated with the road system, mainly the Parks and Glenn highways, but also the Denali Highway, Petersvil1e Road, and other secondary roads. Camping sites for RVs are located in state parks, recreation areas or sites, borough/community parks, or on private land. Some state highway pulloffs also permit overnight camping. Map 1 includes all state parks, recreation areas or sites which provide camping. There are currently approximately 137 camp sites suitable for RV and tent campers managed by the state within 10 park units along the Parks and Glenn highways. There is also one state and one federal campground along the Denali Highway. Most of these recreation areas offer at least equal space for picnicking. Sections 2 and 4 below discuss tent camping and picnicking respectively.
19 r- In addition to state owned areas, the private sector operates numerous camping facilities. There are five privately owned areas along the Glenn Highway (Matanuska Glacier, Sheep Mountain Lodge,two at Lake Louise and Tolsona Wilderness Camp). There are four private areas along the Parks Highway, (Goose Creek, Montana Creek, and two along the Talkeetna Spur Road one each at Benka Lake and Christiansen Lake).
2. Tent Camping and Hiking
Tent camping can be associated with both highway, travel or with backcountry hiking.
Most recreational vehicle camping sites are usable by tent campers, although tent campers may not frequent serviced camper parks as often as they would tent-only campgrounds or more remote, hike-in areas. The supply of land for backcountry tent camping is difficult to quantify, but appears to be abundant. Popular areas include the extensive trail system west of the Parks Highway, Byer's Lake and the Talkeetna Mountains.
Hiking and tent camping can occur in conjunction with a number of other 'recreational activities - hunting, fishing, camping, or skiing. Hiking may be for day trips or longer periods of time. The Matanuska-Susitna Borough Trails Committee has published an inventory of trails within the borough. Trails are defined as land and water routes with or without right-of-way, which make it possible to move about within the borough and are not defined by borough regulations as "roads" (Mat-Su Borough, 1982). The Trails Committee estimates there are approximately 1000 miles of cataloged trails within the borough (including the Willow Sub-basin) and at least another 700 L miles that are not yet mapped or cataloged. These trails receive a variety of uses (e.g., for recreational hiking, X-C skiing and access) which may change depending on the season and heed. Trails used for cross-country skiing or snowmobiling often can be used in the summer for hiking. There are an estimated 610 miles of cleared trails suitable for hiking within the study area (break down into geographic region.) Map 1 shows only the Iditar6d, Chickaloon-Knik-Nelchina and Purinton trails due to the small scale of the map. In addition to man-made trails, hikers may utilize [ informal, unmaintained trails, game trails or simply follow natural L features.
3. Picnicking
Approximately 35% of picnicking can be assumed to occur in conjunction with a variety of other activities: fishing, camping, hiking, etc. The majority of single purpose picnicking is generally associated with highway travel or community activities. Thus, the supply of lan.d for this activity is generally located along the major I roads in the study area. There are 89 developed picnic sites along L the Parks Highway (including the Willow Sub-basin), and 20 developed sites along the Glenn Highway. I I L 20 L SUSITNA STUDY AREA --,Cantwell"'.",.----..-...... RECREATION LAND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: it".' " l EXISTING STATE PARK SYSTEM RECREATION l PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS I (LABELED) k.-· ...l TRAILS l ~ SITES'
l J
PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE STATE l PARK SYSTEM PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS (LABELED) I Mt. Susitna l 2 Hatcher Pass 3 Jim/Swan Lakes 4 Gunsight Mt. 5 Susitna Lake/Tyone R. 6 South Lake Louise 7 Tazlina Lake
o TRAILS
1--""1 RECREATION RIVERS
~ SITES * J OTHER PUBLIC LANDS WHERE RECREATION IS A PROPOSED J PRIMARY USE RECREATION AREAS
RECREATION RIVERS
SITES •
PUBLIC LANDS WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT D RECREATION VALUE
PRIVATE LANDS J WILLOW SUBBASIN BOUNDARY D
• Recreation sites are generally smaller than e recreation areas. 0 6 12 18 24 I MILES 1984 4. Kayaking/Canoeing
Recreational iiver floating has experienced a boom in recent years. Air taxi operators have seen dramatic increases in the number of float trip charters in which drop-off and pick-up times and locations are coordinated. A variety of reasons for float trips can be distinguished.
Trips motivated primarily by white water floating take place on large glacial rivers, where steep gradients and large water volumes provide difficult challenges. Major rivers of this type are the Matanuska, Talkeetna, Susitna,Chulitna and Kahiltna.
Sport fishing and camping also motivate many river floats. A few floatable, clear water streams in the western portion of the study area host the bulk of this use. Ample resident fish populations, gentle gradients and potable water make this area attractive. The .most popular rivers are the Talachulitna, Alexander, Kroto and Lake Creeks.
Other types of boating use are popular, especially on rivers. Commercial river raft operations have expanded rapidly into a field previously left to individual enthusiasts. Several firms have begun offering one or two day float trips, typically providing all equipment and provisions. The Matanuska River is especially popular for this activity.
Powerboats also are used widely for access to hunting and fishing spots, general transportation, and hauling supplies to remote cabins.
Use patterns radiate from the high~ay system and Alaska Railroad. Major launching points are along the Parks Highway at the Susitna River bridge; the Little Susitna River, Willow Creek and Susitna landing; from the Petersville Road onto Kroto, Peters and Moose creeks; and from Talkeetna onto the Talkeetna River.
5. Cross-Country Skiing
Cross-country skiing is fast becoming one of' the most popular recreational activities in the area. In the Susitna Basin, urban Alaskans have access to a wide range of skiing opportunities. Skiers can quickly and easily find themselves in open, mountainous terrain for a few hours of exercise, or on destination-oriented outings of longer duration. Due to potentially severe weather conditions, short daylight hours, and the activity's strenuous nature, however, skiing is primarily day-use in nature. Destination-oriented skiing is not nearly so concentrated as day skiing. Being independent of support facilities and of longer duration, these trips are dispersed throughout the study area. Notable skiing areas are the southern Talkeetna Mountains where trails from the Glenn Highway prOVide access, and the southern slopes of the Alaska Range accessible primarily from Petersville Road and by small plane.
21 [ I
Settled areas northwest of Talkeetna (Chase, Chunilna Creek) and north . of Petersville Road (Swan Lake, Tokosha area) are skiing centers, where many residents have adopted that travel mode as a lifestyle choice. 6. Snowmobiling r Recreational snowmobiling tends to be oriented toward three major l uses: racing, use near road systems, and back country travel. Major f· organizations sponsor several races each year, most occuring alongside highways or on lake tracks. The Talkeetna to Anchorage Fur Rondezvous \, race is the most popular event in the study area. Urban activity is generally confined to the highway system in the more populated areas. Major travel routes are along the entire route of the Parks Highway, the Iditarod and associated trails from Knik to the Susitna River, and several trails emanating from the Glenn Highway and Petersville Road.
Back country snowmobiling consists primarily of providing access to several areas which, due to lack of roads or wet terrain, are otherwise little used. Their speed. and load capacity allow trips farther into the back country than traditional travel modes. They are used for work as well as recreation. This is particularly true of areas with year round or winter populations like the Skwentna, Chase and Tokosha regions. Summer travel is confined to other modes of transportation, but in the winter snow machining opens large areas to recreation, work and trapping. r , C. OTHER RECREATIONAL RESOURCES AND ACTIVITIES i 1. Driving For Pleasure I i Driving for pleasure is a popular recreational activity among Alaskans. The 1979 Alaska Public Survey (background data to DPOR' s 1981 Alaska Outdoor Recreation Plan) found that the average adult (statewide) participates in this activity more frequently than any other. It is also rated highly by visitors to the state. Roads are basically the only facility needed to serVe this activity although turnouts along maj or highways help make the experience more enjoyable. The portion of the Glenn Highway within the study area is especially popular for pleasure driving due to its scenic qualities and number of turnouts (12 total).
2. Mountaineering
Mountaineering and glacier climbing are becoming increasingly popular recreational activities. There are well used areas in all the major mountains in the study area: the Alaska Range, Curry Ridge off the Parks Highway and the Talkeetna Mountains and the Chugach Range. The ,r. most popular areas are those that are most accessible: the fly in glaciers in the Alaska Range, and the portions of the Talkeetna and ! Chugach nearest the Glenn Highway. ! t .
22 3. Wildlife Viewing
This activity can and does occur anywhere there is wildlife that people want to watch or. photograph. This activity receives more attention under the "Non-consumptive Use" section of the fish and wildlife element.
4. Flightseeing
This aerial form of sightseeing probably receives more use by visitors than residents, although it is probably a common part of air travel by residents en route to other destinations and activities. The Alaska Range is one of the most popular areas for flightseeing.
5. Berry Picking
This activity is supported primarily by road-accessible areas well supplied with a variety of berries and bears. The best berry picking areas are often well-kept secrets but popular areas seem to be beyond Mile 90 on the Glenn Highway, along the Lake Louise Road and Denali Highway, in the vicinity of Talkeetna,and near Hurricane along the Parks Highway.
6. Scenic Resources
Areas possessing landscape and cultural characteristics which are visually pleasing to observers can be said to encompass scenic resources. Scenic resources in the study area often area primary motivation for visiting or traveling within the study area. A cross-country ski trip may b~ enhanced by traveling through an open valley with views of the mountains rather than skiing along the railroad tracks. Driving for pleasure is a popular recreational activity and is often motivated by the scenery visible from the road.
Visual assessment studies have been done for the Parks, Glenn, and Denali-Richardson highways. The general methodology used to determine the scenic value of these areas involves calculating the "intrinsic visual quality" of an area by rating the following nine factors:
1) Land - sky interface 2) Landform 3) Landcover 4) Water form 5) Surprise 6) Anticipation 7) Sequential diversity 8) Lateral views 9) Unique visual elements
23 Scenic resources in the study area are not mapped t although the aforementioned studies on highway corridors have been used to help identify potential recreation areas. As an indication of the growing
acknowledgement and support for protection of scenic resources t especially adjacent to highway corridors t a group of residents have orgariized the Sheep Mountain Coalition. .They have circulated two petitions one for the designation of the Glenn Highway from Palmer t f ' to Glennallen as a scenic highway t with provisions for landscape analysis studies to be done prior to any highway design or reconstruction. The second petition requests that the Governor designate a public use area (5-12 miles wide) along a portion of the highway to protect the diversity of recreational opportunities based on the extensive trail system and wide variety of wildlife habitats.
This proposed area t called the Gunsight Mountain Public Use Area t overlaps somewhat with two other propsals in .the area -- the Gunsight Mountain Recreation Area proposed by DPOR in approximately the same
location t and an ADF&G proposal for legislative or administrative designation of a large area t called the Nelchina Public Use Area.
Besides the petitions t the coalition has been responsible for introduction of bills in the legislature dealing with the designation of state highways as scenic highways and requesting appropriation of
$100 t OOO to DOT!PF for study of the Glenn Highway for scenic highway management and possible designation. These bills were referred to
committee t but did not pass in 1983 and were not reintroduced in the 1984 legislative session.
A copy of the petitions t bills and background information from the coalition is included in Appendix A. The sceni·c assessment documents
are all available from DNR t Resource Allocation Section. 7. Heritage Resources L
This category encompasses areas t sites or features which provide a record of human history and include archaeological and historical areas. Although there are numerous heritage resources within the
study area t little is known about them. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently has published a cultural resource assessment for the Lower Susitna River Basin and Beluga River area in cooperation with DNR.
This study describes known heritage resources within three time
periods: prehistoric t ethnohistoric t and historic. It is believed that significant prehistoric sites will eventually be found within the study area although few have been identified to date. The ethnohistoric period bridges the gap between Native history and western civilization; it thus overlaps both the preshistoric and historic periods. Additional information is in DPOR's files. r t
24 L In addition to the above areas~ studies have been done· on archaeological and historical resources in conjunction with the Susitna hydro project. Areas surveyed included the Watana and Devil's Canyon sites and impoundments, borrow areas and associated facilities, the access route, transmission lines and other areas. If a site is deemed "significant", it is eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Of 116 known sites located in the central study area, 18 were systematically tested and preliminary review suggests that all may be eligible for the National Register.
Even the limited amount of study done to date in these various portions of the study area suggests that significant historical and archaeological resources probably do exist and that further measures are needed to identify and protect these areas.
8. Wilderness Areas
Wilderness areas are those with minimal or no evidence of current or past human intervention and which provide the opportunity for wilderness oriented recreation and solitude. Generally, the remote mountainous regions of the study area (the Talkeetna Mountains, and the Alaska and Chugach Ranges) have the highest. wilderness values. Wilderness areas are not delineated on the recreation map •
. 9. Unique Natural Features
Areas, sites, or features such as waterfalls, hot springs, volcanoes or other geologic features that are unique to the study area can be classified under this heading. In addition, unique wildlife, which are of existing or potential interest to the public for scientific study, educational purposes and enjoyment, may be included. Ecological reserves are another category under this general heading. Since ecological reserves are probably the least understood of the, above mentioned resources, a brief discussion of their purpose and function follows.
The concept of ecological reserves is not new. Historically, various governmental agencies have designated areas for scientific study and educational purposes. A proposal to establish ecological reserves in Alaska was adopted by the Federal State Land Use Planning Commission in 1972. Since then the idea has been expanded - 222 sites have been identified statewide and an Ecological Reserves Council with 11 members has been appointed. Ecological reserves are designed to protect scientific, research and natural areas and are identified because they would make an ideal ecosystem. Ideally, the basis for selecting ecological reserves should be a complete list of the major natural features of a region, including typical ecosystems, samples of rare species habitats or unique ecosystems, and special geologic or soil features. Ecological reserves are merely identified as areas meeting the above criteria. They are not actively managed by any agency nor are they classified for a particular use. Those in private ownership are not under any restrictions whatsoever.
25 ,I., I Some sites selected for inclusion in the system are undisturbed areas where research and educational activities can be conducted. on undisturbed ecosystems. Disturbed areas can be useful for studying natural processes of recovery. Other sites can serve as study areas where management practices are developed or tested.
Ecological reserves can be small sites or larger areas; those in the Susitna Area are less than a township in size. At one point it was suggested that the National Park Service and DPOR work through DNR's Statewide Plan to analyze and prioritize ecological reserves. This was never accomplished and would be a good starting place to develop a meaningful ecological reserve system.
In and of themselves, these sites may not always be considered recreational resources, but the act of visiting them for their scenic or unique qualities could be considered a recreational experience. There are seven ecological reserves identified by An Ecological Reserves Report, Volume I: Establishing A System for Alaska (FSLUPC, March, 1979) within the Susitna area (including the Willow Sub-basin) : 1) Crazy Notch - Federal (Talkeetna Mountains Subregion) r 2) Lake Louise - Private (Lake Louise Subregion) 1 3) Susitna/Montana Creek - Private (Native Village Selection) (South Parks Highway Subregion) 4) Ruth Glacier Terminus - Federal (Denali National Park and Preserve) l' 5) Susitna River Flats - State (Willow Sub-basin) 6) Ruth Glacier - Federal (Denali National Park and Preserve)
7) Cottonwood - State (Willow Sub-basin) '----r
r
1\.. .
r I L 26 CHAPTER V
SUPPLY/DEMAND ANALYSIS
A. PURPOSE/ORGANIZATION OF CHAPTER
This chapter summarizes supply and demand infbrmation presented in Chapters III and IV and discusses the feasibility and desirability of meeting recreation demand. The first section provides a general overview of recreational - use and resources in the study area. The second section compares supply and demand for different types of recreational activities and offers management recommendations based on this supply/demand analysis.
B. OVERVIEW OF RECREATIONAL USES AND RESOURCES
Within the Susitna study area there are vast tracts of undeveloped lands suitable for a variety of recreational uses. This suggests that there is an abundant supply of land to support a wide variety of recreational opportunities and, in the case of some recreation activities, this is true. However, -although there are large areas of undeveloped public land, much of the land capable of supporting activities for which demands are greatest -- road accessible fishing, camping and picnicking -- is in private ownership.
In general, road accessible lands near population centers are in private ownership, while remote outlying areas are publicly owned. Even though there are many acres of public land in non-road accessible areas, some of the mbst attractive of these are being bffered for sale. Numerous l-akes are ringed with old open-to-entry (OTE) sale sites. Current state land disposals also have resulted in the sale of much waterfront land, although these sales typically leave more land in public ownership than did the OTE program. In summary, many of the historic and potential recreational lands that also have high settlement values are already in private ownership and remaining parcels of such land are under pressure for sale.
One of DPOR' s goals is to buy back valuable recreation land already transferred from public to private ownership. During the last five years (1979 through 1983) the Division has spent $3,168,000 buying back private property in the Mat-Su District that is much needed for fishing access and off-road camping facilities, and the District is much smaller than the Susitna Study Area. 1
IBy comparison, during the last five years in the Kenai District, the monies - spent acquiring private properties were $2,759,100 while the operating budget for the Kenai District was $1,932,100.
27 Provision of facilities to support recreational use lags far behind acquisition of lands to support such uses. There are relatively few campgrounds along the major highways, few signed maintained trails, and few road accessible salmon fishing streams. Some undeveloped wilderness I is accessible via roads but the majority is reachable only by plane or boat.
C. COMPARISON OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND FOR MAJOR TYPES OF RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES, AND IMPLICA!IONS FOR MANAGEMENT
This section presents a brief analysis of the supply and demand for major types of recreational activities. For each type of use, lands and facilities that now or in the future might support this activity are compared with existing and expected future levels of this use. A discussion of management implications follows each analysis. Recreational activities are divided into the following categories: 1) those associated with developed road accessible facilities, 2) those using few developed facilities, 3) water based activities, 4) driving for pleasure, and 5) other activities, including mountaineering, f wildlife viewing, etc. In addition, recommendations for access and a ! four-season recreation complex are discussed. The recreation activities I for which detailed demand projections were developed fall under the first three categories. I' 1. Activities Associated Ptrimarily With Road Accessible Areas and I Requiring Developed Facilities (RV & Tent Camping, Picnicking)
Within the Susitna study area, opportunities for some recreational activities are abundant, while opportunities for others are definitely lacking. In general, land suitable for developed facilities in road accessible areas is much less available than land suitable for more dispersed recreational activities that generally occur in outlying areas.
Based on user day and facility demand studies done by SCS, and an L inventory of existing (1982) facilities done by DLWM Resource Allocation Section and DPOR, it is evident that demands for picnicking, RV camping, and tent camping far exceed supplies. An estimated 832 sites are needed now for RV camping, 447 for tent camping, and 502 for picnicking based on peak day demand for residents and non-residents. As noted in Chapter IV there are 10 state-managed recreation areas along the Parks and Glenn highways. L These provide approximately 148 camping spots for RVs and/or tents and an estimated equal number of picnic sites. In addition, there is one state and one federal campground along the Denali Highway and a total of nine privately owned campgrounds along the Parks and Glenn Highways. These two public and nine private campgrounds r ' contain less than 85 total camping spots. It is obvious from these 1 estimates that a severe shortage of developed road-accessible recreation facilities currently exists. ! l
f L 28 Given an average of 15 campsites per new recreational area (existing units have between 5 & 61), 37 new recreation sites, each averaging 145 acres (based on existing park units, excluding Denali State Park), are needed to satisfy existing peak day demand. If we assume that picnic, RV, and tent sites overlap in their demands for land, an estimated 5365 acres will be needed to meet this demand (based on 145 acres/area using RV site demands).
2. Dispersed Activities Requiring Limited Developed Facilities (hiking, cross-country skiing, snowmobiling)
As mentioned in Chapter IV, assessing the supply of land for certain activities like hiking is difficult because some people will use established maintained trails while others will follow game trails or natural features. Cross-country skiing is estimated to require the greatest number of trail miles, 92.6 total miles for both the Parks and Glenn Highways (see Table 1). Many of these ski trails probably can be used to help satisfy the need for 62.3 miles of summer hiking trails. Snowmobilers also may use these trails, but much of theiractivity is in conjunction with racing, which often occurs alongside roads or on lake tracks (an estimated 59.5 trail miles are needed to meet existing demand). For activities that require trails or open land rather than developed facilities, supply appears to be sufficient if we include any public land used for these activities, as well as developed maintained trails. Refer to Chapter IV, Section B3 for a disussion of Mat-Su Borough estimates of trail miles (they estimate 1000 miles of trails).
Although the supply of land for dispersed activities appears to be adequate, it is only because much of the study area is still in public ownership and currently remains undeveloped. As the population of Anchorage and the Borough grows, more development will occur, more land will be transferred to private ownership, and the demand for recreational opportunities will increase. In order to provide adequate opportunities for future recreational use of the region, large areas of public land need to be identified and reserved now.
3. Water Based Activities (canoeing/kayaking and others)
As mentioned in Chapter IV there are numerous glacial and clearwater rivers in the Susitna area used for a variety of water based activities. The SCS estimated that a total of 88.2 accessible stream miles are currently needed in the study area to satisfy existing (1982) demand for canoeing/kayaking. The supply of
29 river/stream miles (and lakes) is sufficient at this time although there appears to be a shortage of marked, designated canoe trails. Rivers including the Matanuska, Talkeetna, Susitna,· Chulitna, f Kahiltna, Talachulitna, and Alexander, Kroto and Lake Creeks are all available and relatively heavily used at this time.
Although there currently appears to be an adequate supply of publicly owned river corridors to support these uses, this could easily change in the future for reasons similar to those discussed in 2 above. There is substantial pressure to sell large portions of river corridors for settlement or agricultural uses. The sale of corridors may diminish the quality of recreational experiences on rivers and, in some cases, preclude access to and therefore use of rivers. In order to provide opportunities for future recreational use of study area rivers, access to these waterbodies and protective, publicly owned corridors must be reserved. More intensive management which will increase access points, facilities and information about river use will res'ult in greater use and dispersion of use in the future.
4. Driving for Pleasure
As noted in Chapter IV driving for pleasure or sightseeing often is done in conjunction with other recreational activities such as photography. The existing supply of roads will not diminish and as I long as there are roads this activity will occur. Demand probably will increase, however, as the population of Anchorage and the borough grows. As demand increases the quality of a recreational driving experience could diminish if .crowded conditions and traffic result. s. Other Activities
Time and data limitations prevented a detailed analysis· of many activities which, taken in total, represent a significant amount of r> use. These activities include mountaineering, wildlife viewing, flightseeing, berry picking, etc., and, like some of the activities I investigated in detail, are primarily non-consumptive. It has been L estimated by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service that, in Alaska, some 287,000 persons annually (both residents and non residents) partake in recreational activities with regard to wildlife alone. Non-wildlife related non-consumptive use would, of I course, be in addition to this.
For the most part, the availability of land is abundant for these activities, but as the population grows and more land is disposed of to the private sector shortages may occur. Recomro.endations for ! preservation of high use areas for non-consumptive activities will l be made on an individual basis as pressure for these high quality sites becomes evident. f ! L
30 6. Access Sites
Protecting access sites to lakes, rivers and other natural amenity feat~res is crucial to the continued use of recreation areas. As noted earlier, there is a real shortage of developed recreation facilities and access sites. Access to important areas should be maintained whenever land is sold or transferred to other uses. Public access sites need not be large nor necessarily developed to meet the objective of providing access to water bodies, viewsites or other areas with recreation values.
7. Major 4-Season Recreation Complex
For a state with a large and growing tourist industry, Alaska is surprisingly lacking in high quality, year-round resorts such as those found in recreation areas in the lower 48. The Susitna area likely could support at least 1.or 2 such facilities. While the feasibility of any such development needs careful evaluation (including consideration of the appropriate role of state government) the potential for such a development appears promising. More study should be encouraged in this direction and should include working with resort developers and recreation market analysts and the Alaska Visitors Association. The National Park Service has expressed interest in developing a major visitor accommodation center on the south side of Denali National Park along the Parks Highway in cooperation with DPOR. A major facility also may be feasible along the Glenn Highway if a land base can be secured for year round recreational activities.
31 L f r 1 [ f-
I I \ " t
I, , l 1 L
1 r- I
! l f I L CHAPTER VI
MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
A. STATEWIDE GOALS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR RECREATION MANAGEMENT IN THE SUSITNA STUDY AREA
The Statewide Natural Resources Plan is the broadest of the plans developed by DNR. It provides the context for the area plans, such as the Susitna Area Plan, by setting forth goals and objectives for each re!;lOUrce. The application of the statewide goals to management of recreational resources in the Susitna Study Area is discussed below.
1. Provide Easily Accessible Outdoor Recreation Opportunities for Present and Future Generations of Alaska Residents
The Susitna Study Area contains significant road access to its northern and eastern limits by means of the Parks and Glenn Highways
(plus a network of secondary roads such as Petersville Road) 0 In addition, it is within an hour's drive of the population center of the state. This combination makes provision of recreation opportunities in this region a major goal. As Anchorage and communities within the Matanuska-Susitna Borough expand, the demand for recreation land will increase vastly. Allocation of land for public recreation is necessary to ensure that land is available for present and future generations.
This may be accomplished through retention and classification of land in public ownership or through legislative or administrative designation of areas as part of the State Park System or public reserve system.
2. Provide Easily Accessible Opportunities for Outdoor Enjoyment of Outstanding Natural Areas for Present and Future Generations
Outstanding natural areas and features contribute to the diversity of the landscape. Where these areas are easily accessible to residents and tourists, they deserve protection through public recreation classification in order to ensure their long term enjoyment.
3. Encourage Appreciation of Alaska's Heritage Resources
Areas with heritage value provide historical knowledge that can contribute significantly to the region's distinctive identity. Only limited information (most in conjunction with the Susitna hydro project) exists on the Susitna Area's heritage resources, but preliminary findings indicate that significant archaeological and historical sites eventually will be discovered. Establishing adequate inventory programs and project planning processes that give early consideration to these resources will be a high priority.
33 4. Encourage Outdoor Recreation on Lands Outside the State Park System
Many recreational activities within the Susitna Study Area often are combined with other pursuits not always associated with a state park designation. Large acreages are needed to meet demands for
trapping t snowmobiling t cross-country skiing t hunt.ing and hiking. The continued use of many large areas is threatened by land
disposals t development of private lands and concurrent loss of access. A prerequisite to non-park recreation is protection of the recreational land base. It is important to protect a diversity of recreation areas and trails.
5. Provide Sunport for and Contribute to Alaska's Tourism Economy
Tourism is an important industry in the State of Alaska and one of the main attractions is the opportunities for such recreational
activities as hunting t fishing t camping t and backcountry experiences. It is doubly important to protect these resources because they provide a source of income for state residents as well as recreational opportunities. I f " For recreation to support and contribute to Alaska's tourism economy recreation land must be avail-able and accessible. A variety of I recreational opportunities from wilderness to developed recreation L facilities is needed. B• MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS I 1. Legislatively Designated Inclusions in the State Park System
Land identified on the element map as meeting certain criteria are recommended for inclusion in the State Park System. The criteria and specific areas recommended are listed below by type of state park unit. These types are as follows:
State Park State Historic Park State Historic Site State Recreation Area State Recreation Site State Trail State Recreation River State Preserve
To further clarify the intent for management of land and resources
within state park units t all lands within each park unit are classified in one or more of the following zones:
Natural - Natural zones are established to provide for molierate-to-low impact and dispersed forms of recreation and to act as buffers between recreational development and wilderness zones.
These zones are relatively undeveloped and undisturbed t and are managed to maintain high scenic qualities and to provide visitors with opportunities for significant, natural outdoor experiences. An I I area's natural landscape character is the dominant feature within t
! {
34
Lr this zone. Landscape modification may be allowed to enhance, maintain, or protect the natural setting according to the unit management plan.
Cultural Cultural zones are established to preserve, investigate, document and interpret Alaska's cultural resources and heritage. Cultural zones are designated to provide adequate protection of historical, cultural, archaeological, or anthropological resources. These zones may contain a single feature or an assemblage of historic features.
Recreational Development - Recreational development zones are established within the State Park System to meet the more intensive recreational needs of the public with convenient and well defined access via roads, railroads, boating anchorages, airstrips, and high standard trails; with more intensively developed recreational facilities such as campgrounds or picnic areas; with guided activities; and with information centers to orient the visitors to the unit's special features. The landscape within this zone can be modified to support educational and recreational activities and/or to enhance wildlife habitat and scenic qualities. These zones are established where soils, slope, drainage and vegetation can support more intensive recreational activities.
Wilderness - Wilderness zones are established to promote, to perpetuate and, where necessary, to restore the wilderness character of the land and its specific values for solitude, physical and mental challenge, scientific study, inspiration and primitive recreational opportunities. These zones are characterized by the natural landscape, its vegetation and geologic forms. Resources modification can occur in this zone only to restore areas to a natural stae. Natural processes will be allowed to operate freely to the extent that human safety and public and private property are protected. a. State Parks (SP)
i. Criteria for Recommendation·
A state park is a relatively spacious area possessing outstanding and distinct natural, cultural, scenic and/or scientific values. The dominant management objective of the unit is to maintain the park's natural and cultural resources for long-term use and enjoyment by the public. A level of recreational opportunities, which is compatible with the unit's resource values, shall be provided. In most cases, the primary purpose of the state park unit is set forth by the legislature through its enabling legislation and accompanying reports.
35 State parks have statewide or regional significance. State parks should be of sufficient size to ensure long-term protection of an area's primary resource values.
The maj ority of lands in a state park normally will be 1- classified as natural and wilderness zones. Recreational development zones will be strategically located to provide public access to, and enjoyment of, park resources.
ii. Sites to be Included
Denali State Park is an example of this category of management. No additional state parks were recommended in the Susitna Area.
iii. Justification
Areas with outstanding natural features and/or a variety of i recreational opportunities are either currently under state { park status (Le', Denali State Park) or do not meet the criteria and are instead recommended for state recreation r areas. L b. State Historic Parks (SHP)
i. Criteria for Recommendation
A state historic park is an area containing an assemblage of significant historical, cultural, archaeological or anthropological resources from representative eras of Alaska's history or prehistory. The dominant management objective of a state historic park is to preserve and interpret historic resources for Alaskans and visitors to the state.
State historic parks possess cultural .resources of statewide or regional significance. A unit's size should be capable of providing adequate protection of historical, cultural, archaeological and/or anthropological resources. State historic parks are generally larger, in terms of land area, than state historic sites.
In most state historic parks, a majority of the land area will be classified as cultural zone. Recreational development zones will be designated for the development of visitor support facilities (i.e., parking lots, interpretive centers, and toilets). The natural zone classification may be used for lands which are managed as buffers between the I unit's historical or cultural resources and existing or L anticipated adjoining land uses. l ! L
36 ii. Sites to be Included
Glenn Highway Subregion - The Matanuska Valley Colony Farm is a proposed state historic park.
iii. Justification
The Matanuska Valley Colony Farm merits designation 'as a State Historic Park to help meet the goal of encouraging appreciation of Alaska's heritage resources and to ensure its long term protection in an area of increasingly private lands. c. State Historic Sites (SHS)
i. Criteria for Recommendation
A state historic site is a relatively small area established and managed to preserve, interpret and/or commemorate a structure, object and/or event of historical, cultural, archaeological or anthropological value which represents an era of Alaska's history or prehistory.
State historic sites possess a cultural resource of statewide or regional significance. They diffet from state historic parks in terms of size and general focus; sites are smaller and focus on single items or events rather than on a complex or assemblage of historic resources.
In most state historic sites, a majority of the land area will be classified as cultural zone. Recreational development zones will be designated for the development of visitor support facilities (i.e; parking lots, interpretive centers, and toilets). The natural zone classification may be used for lands which are managed as buffers between the unit's historical or cultural resources and existing or anticipated adjoining land uses.
ii. Sites to be Included
There are no existing or proposed state historic sites within the Susitna Area.
iii. Justification
Besides the Matanuska Valley Colony Farm, other known historical sites, particularly in the Palmer and Talkeetna areas (e.g., Willow Community Hall, Tealand's General Store, Palmer and Wasilla Depots, and the Fairview Inn in Talkeetna) have been protected through inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. The Roadhouse in
37 Talkeetna is also proposed for National Register designation. Since these sites are already protected, no sites are recommended for inclusion as State Historic Sites. J d. State Recreation Areas (SRA) i. Criteria for Recommendation l A state recreation area is a relatively spacious unit and possesses a diversity of outdoor recreational opportunities. The dominant management objective of the unit is to provide a maximum level of outdoor recreational opportunity based on the natural values of the unit and its ability to sustain use without significant adverse effects on natural systems.
A state recreation area possesses recreational and/or natural resources of statewide or regional significance. A state recreation area represents diverse natural landscapes capable of supporting a wide variety of outdoor activities. {r The majority of the lands within a state recreation area will be classified as natural and recreational development. { Cultural zones will be established where appropriate. Only in special cases will any lands be classified as wilderness. I
ii. Sites to be Included/Justification
Designation of SRAs is needed where recreation values are so great that legislative designation to ensure long term protection is merited. Designated areas will· provide for high participation in a number of activities. Recommended areas are intended to meet the demand of the current population which participates in recreational activities. The distribution and number of recreation areas with long term protection also must meet the needs of the projected increase in population. Although there is probably some overlap between different types of trail users, snowmobiling and cross~country skiing are not always compatible activities and, for this reason, within any designated recreation area, certain areas and trails should be reserved for each use. The following areas are proposed to meet these needs:
Mt. Susitna Subregion - The Mt. Susitna State Recreaton Area, including Big and Little Mt. Susitna, is proposed for this subregion to protect the exceptional recreation values which include alpine hiking, cross country skiing and (r perhaps one of the best potential downhill ski areas in the study area. The area also has high fish and wildlife and f forestry values which would be protected through this designation. L I L 38 L Glenn Highway Subregion - The proposed Gunsight Mountain State Recreation Area is within this subregion. It is a large block of land on either side of the Glenn Highway between Matanuska Glacier and Slide Mountain. It is an excellent winter recreation area with summer potential for hiking and developed camping. The densest concentration of identified trails in the study area is found here. Most of these originated as mining trails and are presently used year round for ATV' s, by hikers and cross-country skiiers. Among the finest snow conditions for cross-country skiing and snowmobiling in southcentral Alaska are found here. Historically (until 1972), caribou hunting was heavy in this area and it is the winter home of the Nelchina herd. Habitat protection is an important corollary to recreational use. Trails and thedevelopment of public use cabins will enhance present recreational activities on a protected land base. The four existing lodges in the area often are booked to capacity during the winter and it is expected that the extraordinarily fine skiing and snowmobiling conditions characteristic of' the area will result in tremendous growth of recreational use in future years.
Lake Louise Subregion - There are three state recreation areas proposed for this 'subregion - Tazlina Lake, Susitna Lake/Tyone River,and South ,Lake Louise. The Tazlina Lake area is important for summer recreation and has the potential to become a very popular road-accessible canoe trip. It incudes Tazlina and Nelchina Rivers. The Susitna Lake/Tyone River area is an extension of the Lake Louise area and is important for summer and winter recreation for both residents of the area and visitors. South Lake Louise is a complex of small lakes and intervening ridges just south of Lake Louise. e. State Recreation Site (SRS)
i. Criteria for Recommendation
A state recreation site is a relatively small area that provides one or more outdoor recreational opportunities. A state recreation site also may be established to provide access to outdoor recreational lands and opportunities not managed as part of the State Park System. Management objectives are site-specific, but generally emphasize recreational use over resource protection.
State recreation sites possess recreational resources of statewide or regional significance. The unit should be of sufficient size to allow for future expansion of recreational facilities, to provide an adequate buffer between adjoining land uses, and for the protection of the quality of recreational opportunities in the unit.
39 Normally, from one-quarter to three-quarters of a state recreation site's land area will be classified as a recreational development zone. Sensitive areas such as wetlands, beaches or streambanks normally will be classified as natural zones. Cultural zones will be identified and established where the presence of historic and archaeologic resources is significant enough to warrant this designation.
ii. Sites to be Included/Justification
Designation of relatively small sites for trailheads, boat launching sites, campgrounds and rest areas will in many locations provide support facilities for extensive recreation opportunities in the back country and on the rivers and lakes. Heavy use of these departure and congregating points requires active management which can be provided within the State Park System. Those along the road system, particularly on or near water, should be developed first. The Division of Parks should work with DOT to ensure that existing turnouts are preserved during any road construction/realignment and new turnouts are added, particularly along the Glenn and Parks Highways. f Glenn Highway Subregion - Additions to three existing state 1 recreation sites are proposed for this subregion - Moose Creek, Long Lake, and Little Nelchina River. All are located on the Glenn Highway and receive substantial public use to justify including additional acreage in the State Park System. At Long Lake there are 480 acres in the state park system and it is recommended that 1200 acres to the south be added. An additional 600 acres are recommended to f'- . be added to the Little Nelchina site.
Parks Highway Subregion - The state has purchased from private owners 35 acres of land between the highway and the mouth of Montana Creek. A campground will be developed on this site as part of the state park system. r Susitna Lowlands Subregion - Four recreation sites have been proposed along the Yentna River - two above Skwentna and two closer to the mouth. f. State Trail (ST)
i. Criteria for Recommendation
[ A state trail is a linear corridor which possesses significant recreational, natural, cultural, wilderness l and/or scenic resource values • The management objective of [ this unit is to provide for the use andlor protection of l
i ! L 40 recreational, educational, historical, scenic and natural values and opportunities for wqich the unit was identified and established.
State trails are of statewide or regional significance. Where possible, the width of the state trail corridor on land will be from 100 feet to one-half mile on each side of the trail centerline. In general, trails of statewide significance should be the greater width. There will be circumstances--such as easement purchases on non-state land--where it will be necessary to establish corridors of less than the desired width. A trail can be established on state land or may be designated in areas where other entities manage the surrounding land. The trail corridor shall be acquired in fee simple public ownership wherever practical and shall be of sufficient width to protect the values and opportunities for which the unit is established.
Since state trails are linear corridors, sections of a trail and adjoining lands will be zoned as necessary to protect the associated resource values. The amount of land classified per zone will, vary from trail to trail depending on the nature of resoutce values present and the desired public use of the trail.
ii. Trails to be Included/Justification
Extraordinarily high participation in trail related recreational activities and/ot preservation of historic values associated with trails merits designation of certain trails as part of the state park system.
Glenn Highway/Talkeetna Mountains subregions The Chickaloon/Knik/Nelchina Trail system is the only trail proposed for legislative designation in the study area. The Iditarod Trail is the only existing State Recreation Trail within the Susitna Study Area. g. State Recreation River (SRR)
i. Criteria for Recommendation
A State Recreation River is a continuous or, where necessary, a discontinuous corridor encompassing a river, or portion of a river, and the associated upland area which possesses significant recreational, natural, cultural, wilderness and/or scenic resource values. The primary management objective of the unit is to provide for the use and protection of the recreational, educational, historical, aesthetic and natural values and opportunities that are associated with the river and its related upland.
41 tf State recreation rivers possess recreational, natural and/or cultural resources of statewide or regional significance. Wherever practical, the unit corridor should be from 200 feet to one mile beyond each riverbank, allowing a natural buffer between the river and adjacent land uses.
Since state recreation rivers are linear corridors, sections of the rivers and adjoining uplands will be zoned as necessary to protect the associated public use and resource values. The percentages of land classified per zone are variable depending upon the resources present and the desired public use of the river.
ii. Rivers to be Included/Justification
Recreational use of rivers always has been an important part of Alaskan life. . In addition to recreational uses, this category intends to maintain fish and wildlife populations at or above current levels and provide for human use of those populations. Waterways selected for SRRs should possess high scenic values, high levels of existing and/or potential public use and reasonable access, either by road or plane. Legislatively designated rivers generally are intended to remain in a natural state with few developments and minimal crossings by road and utility corridors. Prior to the Susitna Area Planning process DPOR identified six rivers proposed for inclusion in the state park system. They are as follows:
South Parks Highway/Talkeetna Mountains subregions - Talkeetna River Petersville Road/Susitna Lowlands - Kroto/Moose creeks Sunflower Basin/Susitna Lowlands - Lake Creek Susitna Lbwlands/Mt. Susitna - Alexander Creek Mt. Susitna - Talachulitna River and Creek h. State Preserve
i. Criteria for Recommendation
A state preserve is an area having outstanding biological, paleontological, geological or ecological values of scientific or educational interest. The primary management objective of the unit is resource protection. The purpose of these units is to provide for applied research, basic I research, and/or outdoor environmental education. Ecological reserves are often candidates for legislative 1 designation as state preserves if more active management is desired.
i ! L
42 A state preserve has a resource or resources of statewide or regional significance. The unit should be of adequate size to provide protection of the natural feature(s)' for which it is established.
The natural zone will be the primary land use zone within a state preserve, thus helping to guarantee protection of the unit's resource values. If there are cultural values associated with the preserve, a cultural zone will be established to protect these values. Wilderness zones also may be designated to help ensure a high level of land and resource protection. Recreational development zones will be used only to allow the provision of scientific or educational support facilities.
ii. Sites to be Included/Justification
As further exploration of the area occurs, sites needing this degree of protection by the state may be identified. However, at this time no areas meeting the above criteria have been identified.
2. Other State Managed Areas Where Recreational Values Should be Protected
Many areas identified in the recreation element are not recommended for inclusion in the stat.e park system, but rather can be protected sufficiently through retention of land in public ownership and designation for recreation (and also fish and wildlife habitat and/orforestry). Following is a discussion of general and specific objectives for each subr~gion including any pertinent guidelines, and a list of sites proposed for each area. Areas of regional significance can be divided into several categories public recreation sites (often access sites), public recreation areas (larger areas offering a variety of opportunities), river corridors, and trails. Major emphasis has been placed on the road accessible subregions.
Glenn Highway
a. Objectives/Guidelines
Protect and enhance views from the Glenn Highway and the Matanuska River; provide scenic turnouts and other opportunities to enj oy views.
On state and borough lands follow guidelines specified in study of Glenn Highway visual resources.
43 In general, state and borough land sales should be located so as not to disrupt the visual quality of corridors. Where possible, settlement should be out of view from the highway. This can be accomplished through the use of vegetative screening, screening behind topographic features, and avoiding sales in broad open valleys at or above treeline.
Encourage private landowners to minimize visual disruption along the highway.
The Glenn Highway realignment should be designed to protect/enhance views from the highway. Work with DOT/PF to accomplish this. Included should be provisions for scenic turnouts and routing' alternatives to protect/enhance visual quality. Generally the highway should be regarded as a recreational facility unto itself as well as a transportation link.
Protect, trail systems and provide access from roads to more remote areas.
Identify (with assistance from the borough) existing and historical trail systems that should be retained in public ownership. Special attention should be given to those routes that now, or in the future will provide access from the highway into the back country. Retaining access into river valleys is also particularly important.
Turnouts are needed to allow people to safely park and use trail systems and should be incorporated into DOT's 'realignment plans for the highway. The borough has prepared a list of locations where turnouts are most needed.
Provide opportunities for road accessible recreation including skiing, snomobiling, camping, hiking, fishing (primarily in lakes) and picnicking.
Better public information is needed concerning recreational opportunities along the Glenn Highway. A comprehensive informational program should include brochures/maps' describing what is available, signs along the highway, and perhaps a visitor center. The Matanuska-Susitna Borough has undertaken a trail signing project but the effort could be improved with funding assistance from DOT and DPOR. b. Areas to be Included
Recreation Areas
Jim/Swan Lakes - Follow the conclusions of the North Anchorage Land Agreement which provides for resolution of land ownership i ! L
44 and .management issues for land owned by the state, the Municipality of Anchorage and Eklutna, Inc. The area should be managed through a cooperative agreement with DPOR, DLWM and ADF&G. It has the potential for a recreation area, game refuge and multiple use area. To resolve problems associated with four-wheel drive induced trail erosion establish two access routes on suitable soils to reduce erosion problems. Other access trails should be retained. in public ownership and limited to winter and non-motorized summer use. A state park or recreation area designation would be suitable for this area.
Extension of the Matanuska Valley Moose Range - This area should remain in public ownership and be managed for multiple use, including forestry and habitat enhancement.
Bonnie Lake - There is an existing SRS at Bonnie Lake but additional land surrounding the main body of lakes, escarpments and cliffs should be retained in public ownership and managed to maintain recreational opportunities.
Purinton Creek Area - This area should be retained in public ownership to provide winter recreation opportunities, including cross-country skiing, ptarmigan and rabbit hunting and trapping.
Castle Mountain -A large block of state land on the south face of Castle Mountain should remain in public ownership for a recreation/wildlife habitat area to be managed by DPOR and ADF&G.
Recreation/Access Sites
Kepler-Bradley Lakes - There is an existing facility at this location which is part of the state park system. Additional public land should be annexed to this area and the state should work cooperatively with the borough and University of Alaska to manage land for recreation on Johnson Lake.
Knik River/Knik Glacier - (Most of this region is out of the study area but all access is up the Knik River from the Glenn Highway Subregion.) Public opportunities to visit this unique area should be improved. The combination of huge glaciers, the Knik Gorge and surrounding mountains has the potential to be a major tourist attraction. Boats and aircraft are, at present, the most practical means of reaching this rugged country but a road along the south side of the Knik River could make recreational opportunities attainable for a much larger portion of the population. Other proposals which should be considered include a visitor's center, the extension of Chugach State Park
45 into the area, an all weather trail· to Lake George, and a cooperative agreement with the Knik-Willow Village Corporation concerning tourism development. An all-weather trail in connection with a public use cabin overlooking Lake George would greatly increase visitation to this area.
Road Access into South Side of Matanuska Valley - Work with foresters and Native Corporation land owners to ensure public. access along the road that currently goes through Wolverine Lake ( Area. I
Recreation Rivers
Matanuska River -A buffer of at least 200 feet on either side of the mean high water mark should be retained in public . ownership to protect visual quality, fish and wildlife habitat and camping/picnicking sites for rafters and people driving the Glenn Highway. I t Wolverine Creek Valley -A buffer of at least 200 feet on either side of the mean high water mark should be retained in public ownership along the river to accommodate recreational use of the { river and access along the associated trail. Acquire public I land for a recreation site at the confluence of the two forks of Wolverine Creek and possibly construct a public use cabin.
Lake Louise a. Objectives/Guidelines
Protect and enhance views from Lake Louise Road; provide turnouts and other opportunities to enjoy views. L Protect trail systems ,and provide access into the back country via water bodies and overland portages.
Provide opportunities for road accessible winter recreation, camping, hiking, fishing (primarily in lakes) and picnicking. b. Areas to be Included
South Lake Louise Recreation Area - This is a flat region of hundreds of lakes and small ponds which can provide visitors with a wilderness experience not possible on Lake Louise itself due to the number of private cabins there. A canoe trail system would provide access into the area by canoe and foot in summer, and cross-country ski and snowmobile in winter, possibly in I connection with a system of public use cabins. I
i ! L 46 Lake Louise Road Corridor - This two mile wide corridor should be managed to protect visual quality and opportunities for caribou hunting and other recreational uses such as berry picking and camping.
Glenn Highway Greenbelt - This corridor should protect the foreground for the view of the Chugach Range south of the Glenn Highway from Snowshoe Lake to Mae West Lake.
Picture Lakes - This area contains a rare concentation of several hundred ponds and lakes which should be managed for public recreation opportunities on the lakes.
Canoe Lakes - This is a small system of lakes near the junction of Lake Louise Road and the Glenn Highway, accessible with a short portage from Lake Louise Road. It should be managed for recreation and wildlife values.
In addition, access sites should be protected in the following areas for hunting and fishing use. Recommendations for future management include camping facilities, public use cabins and encouragement of winter activities. The sites are: Snowshoe Lake sites, Three Lakes, Fish Lake, Crater Lakes, Kelly Lake, Marie Lake, Maxson Lake, Grayling Lake, First Hill Lake, Second Hill Lake, Crosswind Lake sites, Bell Lake, Moore and Lily Lakes, Fort Lake, Bragg Mountain, Headwater Lake; Gulkana River Lake, and Deep Lake.
Mendeltna Creek/Old Man Lake -A buffer of 200 feet on either side of the mean high water mark should be retained in public ownership to protect existing and future use of Mendeltna Creek. In addition, at least 50% of all public land within 500' of the lakeshore and all islands should be retained in public ownership; retained lands should include at least 50% of the shoreline, and land adjacent to lake inlets and outlets.
Talkeetna Mountains a. Objectives/Guidelines
Link access points along the Parks, Glenn, Denali highways and Lake Louise Road with trails int"o the back country.
Encourage additional use through information programs and support proposals for increased access. b. Areas to be Included
The following sites have been identified for recreation purposes as hunting/fishing access sites with future opportunities for camping facilities or public use cabins: Horse Pasture Pass, Cirque Lake, Crater Lake, Black Lake, Commonwealth Lakes, Square
47 Lake, Oshetna River site, Tyone Ponds, Nelchina Townsite, John Creek Lakes, Mirror Lakes, Clarence Lake, Wolf Paw Lakes, Watana Lake, Terrace Lakes, Big Lakes, Evergreen Lakes, Isla,nd Lake, Rainbow Lake, Deadman Lake, Butte Lake, Swamp Buggy Lake, Old Denali Cultural Site (BLM) , Paradise Lakes, Copeland Lake, Honolulu Lake and Hicks Lake.
North and South Parks Highway
a. Objectives/Guidelines
Protect and enhance the scenic qualities of the Parks Highway; provide scenic turnouts and other opportunities to enjoy views.
On state and borough land follow guidelines specified in the study "Scenic Reources Along the Parks Highway."
Encourage private landowners to minimize visual disruption along the highway. f Avoid the sale of state and borough land north of Denali { State Park and Denali National Park and Preserve and east of the highway. Sell land west of the highway in a manner that will minimize effects on views from the road.
Improve views through small scale timber sales of personal use harvests in areas where eXisting. vegetation blocks exceptional views of the Alaska or Talkeetna Range.
Improve and maintain turnouts along the highway; consider use of old gravel sites for this purpose. i
Provide more opportunities for road accessible fishing (Within one mile either side of highway), particularly stream fishing. In addition, provide further opportunities for road-accessible camping and picnicking.
Provide parking and access to the many salmon streams that cross the Parks Highway. Consider the purchase of private land at the more heavily used locations.
Provide more road accessible camping facilities, particularly close to the best fishing sites along the Parks Highway and other roads in the area. The Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation should inventory carefully the fE:!w
remaining parcels of road-accessible state lands on the ! Parks Highway south of Denali State Park and determine which should be reserved for possible future camping/picnicking I sites. ! Protect and enhance access to the backcountry for hiking, t climbing, winter recreation, and camping. i ! L 48 L Additional access, in the form of turnouts, should be provided at points along the highway to allow opportunities for backcountry use of the area. This includes access to streams which are used to reach remote areas.
Provide opportunities for enhanced tourist activities and enjoyment of Denali National Park and Preserve by developing a major lodge/resort in the vicinity.
Provide small specific access sites along the highway to enhance use of the area, particularly Denali State Park.
Better public informtion is needed to create an awareness of recreational opportunities in this region. Work with the . borough on their proposal to develop a visitor center at the junction of the Parks and Glenn Highways. b. Sites to be Included
DOT maintains waysides alon& the highway at old gravel sites at the crossings of the Susitna River, Honolulu Creek, the East Fork of the Chulitna and at Byers Lake. These areas contain picnic and restroom facilities, campsites, firesites, and communi ty kitchens. They should be upgraded by adding picnic and restroom facilities.
There are two old roads in the M(mtana Creek area - one runs ~l1ong the South Fork, and the other goes north into Bartlett Hills. These are fairly well protected, but DPOR should work with the borough to maintain them in public ownership. In addition, small lakes to the east should be retained for float plane access into the area.
Sheep Creek - There is borough and Native land in this area. Parks has bought access across private land to the borough land. Work with the borough to retain their land in public ownership. Easements have been maintained across Cook Inlet Native land in the area.
Sunshine Creek - This area is important for access. Develop a cooperative agreement with the borough concerning construction of a parking lot at the site of the old land fill.
North Fork of the Kashwitna - Maintain access to this stream in public ownership. The stream is important for fishing and also as access into the backcountry.
Goose Creek - This area is currently in private ownership, but access to the stream is maintained since the owner allows people to cross the land for a nominal fee. A public easement should be obtained at this site to ensure public access to the area.
Byers Lake or Curry Ridge -A major tourist facility should be developed at one of these two locations (similar to what was
49 proposed for Tokositna). A site assessment is needed to determine the optimum location for a lodge; the advantages of Curry Ridge are its proximity to the Parks Highway and Alaska Railroad, the views of the Alaska Range and Mt. McKinley, the potential for cross-country skiing and its ability to provide r access into Denali State Park. I \ Whistle stops along the Alaska Railroad - As mitigation for the proposed dams at Devil' s Canyon and Watana, Division of Parks has proposed to Alaska Power Authority (APA) that three recreational nodes be developed along the railroad - Curry, Gold Creek, and Indian River. Gold Creek is the proposed RR spur for the dams. Recreational opportunities in the area include floating from Indian River to Gold Creek to Talkeetna, fishing, cross-country skiing near Talkeetna (private owners already have developed over 25 miles of trails), and (summer) trail system from Coal Creek to Troublesome Creek and a connection to Byer's Creek (trailhead at Coal Creek) which should be complete by summer 1984. Camping facilities are proposed for Curry, Gold Creek, and Indian River; either of the latter two would be good sites for public recreation cabins. { In the North Parks Highway Subregion, Colorado Lakes; Hurricane, Honolulu, and Chulitna River cross-country ski areas; and Summit t Lake/Broad Pass berry-picking fields should be reserved for public use.
Petersville Road a. Objectives/Guidelines ri .." Protect and enhance the scenic qualities of the Petersville Road; provide turnouts and other opportunities to enjoy views. r Encourage private landowners to minimize visual disruption along the road.
Improve views through small scale timber sales or personal use harvests in areas where existing vegetation blocks exceptional views.
Upgrade Petersville Road in order to provide year-round access into the backcountry.
Provide more opporunities for road accessible fishing, camping and picnicking.
Provide more camping facilities. I Identify and protect trails to enable access to the backcountry for hunting, hiking, camping and winter recreation. l I ! L 50 Turnouts for parking should be provided along the road. b. Sites to be Included
Additional access is needed to the south side of Denali Natonal Park. Petersville Road should be upgraded to a year-round road and· the feasibility of developing a campground at the end of Petersville Road investigated. The campground would serve as the more primitive counterpart to a lodge at Curry Ridge and would allow and encourage access into the backcountry of the national park. In addition to a campground and visitor center at the end of the road, sites along the road should be developed to accommodate recreational use. A study should be conducted to determine the best potential sites along the road, particularly in the vicinity of the road crossings at Moose and Kroto Creeks, and the Oilwell Road crossing at Moose Creek.
Use of/Access to Denali State Park - The park currently does not receive a high level of use, primarily because access to the area is limited. Work to develop a recreation facility (possibly a campground, but at minimum a parking area and an information board) at the southern border of the park, on the west side of the Parks Highway. This location is on the west side of· the Chulitna River and would allow summer access into much of the park. Develop more trails and some public use cabins in association with trails. Cabins will promote year-round use.
Tokosha Roadless Area - The Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation supports the Tokosha Citizen Council \s requ~st for a roadless· area. Work with the borough and specifically, the citizens of Tokosha to develop ski cabins and summer/winter trails in areas away from private cabins.
Rabideux Creek - Develop a campground at the mouth of Rabideux Creek on the west side of the Susitna River just south of the Parks Highway.
Sunflower Basin/Susitna Lowlands/Mt.Susitna/Beluga a. Objectives/Guidelines
Protect the scenic and habitat qualities of major clearwater stream corridors in the area.
On state and borough land maintain a half-mile wide corridor on either side of the riverbank along specified clearwater streams to protect habitat and scenic qualities. Recommendations concerning specific classification of corridors should be coordinated with ADF&G since the character of use of the rivers is· currently largely controlled by their fishing regulations.
51 f-
Work with the borough to encourage private landowners to protect scenic qualities of areas adjacent to clearwater rivers.
Retain the majority of land within the river corridor in public ownership; where land is sold, design and locate the disposal in a manner to minimize effects on use of and views f from the corridor. 1 Protect recreational values of glacial stream corrridors.
Along glacial rivers, retain a 200' buffer on either side of the riverbank in public ownership to protect the corridor. Also protect sites the the mouths of tributaries to glacial rivers.
Maintain access to rivers through corridors and easements.
Protect scenic and historical qualities of the Iditarod Trail. Retain in public ownership a 1000' corridor (500' either I side of the centerline) for the Iditarod Trail. For any { disposals adjacent to the trail, require as part of the contract that the trail be surveyed. [ Protect the scenic, recreational and habitat value of lakes. 1
Where public land is conveyed to private ownership, at least ( 50% of all public larld within 500' of the lakeshore and all I islands will be retained in public ownership; retained lands should include 50% of the actual shoreline, and land adjacent to lake inlets and outlets. 1, -- b. Areas to be Included
Sunflower Basin - The Chelatna Lake area should be retained in I public ownership to protect visual quality within one of the finest Mt. McKinley landscapes, and to protect wildlife values around one of the few latge lakes remaining in public ownership in the Susitna Valley. Several public use cabins are recommended. The south end of the lake is the beginning for Lake Creek float trips and additional camping faclities may be necessary.
Mt. Susitna - The Canyon Creek area includes a complex of lakes along the Talachulitna River, a corridor along Canyon Creek and the mouths of Thursday, Friday, and Saturday Creeks. Retain half of Canyon Lake in public ownership.
Sites to be Included
Beluga - Retain in public ownership a natural phenomenon site at Strandline Lake and Triumvirate Glacier where a natural ice dam forms a self-dumping lake. Investigate the possibility of developing recreation sites along Beluga Road.
52 River Access
Susitna Lowlands - The mouth of Peters Creek at Kahiltna Rive~ should be managed as a public access and camping area.
Mt. Susitna/Beluga - Access sites located on Coal Creek Lake, Coal Creek and the head of Beluga Lake near Tri~mvirate Glacier should be managed as public camping sites.
There are two access sites on Beluga River which will serve future hunting and fishing opportunities for the public. These should be managed to permit undeveloped camping opportunities.
Lake Access
Sunflower Basin - Several lakes in the area (Donkey Creek Lake, Shulin Lake, Shovel Lake, Amber Lake, Bunco Lake, Jake Lake and Schneider Lake) are important fly-in access points for guides • Retain at least half of these in public ownership. Swan Lake and Chelatna Lake should be retained in public ownership, with Chelatna Lake becoming part of Lake Creek State Recreation River.
Susitna Lowlands - West of the Parks Highway and south of Petersville Road are three lake complexes which contain important swan nesting areas and much ·swampy ground. These should be managed for wildlife habitat values and wilderness recreation values. They are Rocky's Lakes, Chambers Lakes, and Swan Nesting Lakes.
Fish Lakes/Bulchitna Lake - The borough and state both own land in this area. Much land has been sold to private individuals. Tie together portions of the lakes remaining in public ownership with recreation/trail corridors.
Shell Lake - Several access sites around the lake should be retained in public ownership.
Beluga - Retain in public ownership an access site on Tukallak Lake to connect Cook Inlet with the lake and Threemile Creek.
Alaska Range a. Objectives/Guidelines
Encourage additional use through informaion programs. Support proposals for increased access for dispersed recreation opportunities. Additional trails and pubic use cabins could be a valuable tool in this regard.
53 I I Chugach Mountains I a. Objectives/Guidelines
Encourage additional use through information programs. Support proposals for increased access. b. Sites to be Included r The following sites should be retained in public ownership to I provide access, opportunities for recreational use and. possible [ future use for public cabins: Hanging Glacier Lake (adjacent to Matanuska Glacier), Hunter Creek (trailhead and camping area near Knik Glacier), Nelchina Bench Lake, and the Lazy Mountain area east of Palmer and north of Jim/Swan Lakes.
! L
r:
\ L
I t I ! L
54
rL Appendix A
Scenic Highway Design~tion for the Glenn Highway
1. The exact shape and implications of this designation for the Glenn Highway are not known at this time because Alaska currently has no such category for its highway system. In other states such as Oregon, there are several scenic highways in the coast range and the most outstanding portions of public lands have been accorded scenic highway status. The principal aim there has been to protect the view from the highway. The effect is that trees are much closer to the highway than current federal standards permit, graceful curves are retained unless they are a proven hazard, and roadside vegetation is permitted near the travel surface to permit viewing of flowers, ferns and shrubs. Turnouts for scenic viewing are numerous as are roadside picnic, trail and camping facilities. In short, it is a highway for the traveler and recreationist and has helped establish Oregon's reputation as one of the most beautiful states to visit.
Along the Glenn Highway, the immediate foreground is very important because it gives the traveler his closest impression of the country and provides the base or frame of reference for viewing distant scenery. However, the mid-ground along the G1enn is crucial because of the open nature of terrain and trees. This is where unsightly powerlines, subdivisions, etc., may be sited to avoid obvious foreground locations. The background mountains are generally safe from all but the most drastic landscape modifications such as mining operations, roads or metal buildings. Scenic consideration of the Glenn Highway should include apropriate protective measures for each of the three distances.
2. A scenic assessment or study along the Glenn Highway between Palmer and Glenallen would identify the finest landscapes and recommend a scenic designation where the highway .passes through public lands of this caliber. The portion betwen Chickaloon River and Tazlina Lake would receive close scrutiny. These are extraordinary landscapes even for Alaska.
3. Scenic protection measures would not be recommended for private lands. However, a cooperative attitude would be sought from private land owners to protect the integrity of the scenic concept, particularly where native lands constitute large blocks along the highway. Efforts would be made to show that scenic protection is in everyone's best interests.
4. Where the study recommends scenic highway designation, scenic protection measures would be the primary use or concern, but not the exclusive one. Other uses would be allowed but modified to protect visual or scenic values. For example, power lines would be consciously located out of sight, often times at no greater cost. Land disposals, gravel extractions, and timber sales would likewise be located to take advantage of terrain interruptions or vegetative screening. The viewshed from the highway would be maintained as it now is, with compatible uses allowed wherever possible or appropriate.
55 5. Highway reconstruction would require careful design review or oversight by landscape architects or others trained in visual assessment techniques.
6. Scenic highway protection along the Glenn would call for more scenic turnouts observation points, trailheads, picnic and camping facilities and a somewhat higher level of use and enj oyment than occurs in the area at. the present time. Turnouts would also reduce conflicts between sightseeing motorists and destination-oriented motorists by accommodating travel speed differences. There would be more greenbelts on public lands along the highway and maintenance procedures would have to protect attractive roadside vegetation and keep important viewscapes open by careful thinning.
This is the essence of what a Scenic Highway designation would do for the Glenn Highway ,after the study is completed and recommendations implemented. It would protect one of the world's most beautiful highways for this and succeeding generations ·for the enj oyment of residents, visitors and travelers. If the highway is not protected soon, the consequences of r unsightly development will be irreversible. i (
[ II ! L
! L I ARLIS I Alaska Resources . l 56 ormation SerVIces Library & Inf Anchorage Alaska