DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Knik Arm Wetlands

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Knik Arm Wetlands UPPER KNIK ARM WETLANDS A proposal for designation as an Area Meriting Special Attention Prepared by: David M. Dall Jon R. Nickles United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service November 1982 i Table of Contents (1) Introduction••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 (2) Basis for Designation•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2 (3) Maps and Description of Geographical Location•••••••••••••• 3 (4) Area Description........................................... 3 A. Dominant Physical Features •••••••••••••••••••• .'....... 3 B. Dominant Biological Features•••••••••••••••••••••••••• 7 (5) Current Land Use •....••.....•.......•....................... 9 A. Ownership • . • . • • . • • • . • • . • • • . • • • • . • • • • . • • . • • . 9 B. Jurisdication and Management Status ••••••••••••••••••• 9 c. Uses, Activities, and Proposed Developments••••••••••• 12 (6) Current and Proposed Use of Adjacent Lands and Waters •••••• 13 (7) Present and Anticipated Conflicts Among Uses and Activities Within or Adjacent to the Area ••••••••••••••••••••••• 14 (8) Proposed Management Scheme ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 14 (9) Recommendations ....•......••..•..•••.•..•.••••......••....• 14 A. Description of Proper and Improper Land and Water Uses Within the Area. • . • . • . 14 B. Summary and Statement of the Policies Applied to Management of the Area ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 16 c. Identification of Authorities Used to Implement the Proposed Management Scheme ••••••••••••••••••••••• 16 ii List of Figures gure 1. Knik Arm Wetlands study area....................................... 4 2. Knik Arm Wetlands study area, landforms•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5 3. Flood hazard and tidal influence areas, Knik Arm Wetlands •••••••••• 6 List of Tables Table 1. Salmon streams within the Knik Arm Wetlands study area••••••••••••• 8 2. Breeding waterfowl averaged for 1975 and 1976 •••••••••••••••••••••• 10 3. Comparison of breeding duck densities in the study area and Cook Inlet area........••••.•.......................••.... 10 4. Moose harvest summary, Unit 14A···································· 11 Page 1 (1) Introduction This report summarizes Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) interests in management of the Upper Knik Arm Wetlands. Supporting information is contained in the report titled Knik Arm Wetlands Study (1981), prepared for the FWS by Alaska Biological Research-.--The Upper Knik Arm Wetlands are located in the coastal zone between Anchorage and Palmer, Alaska, at the upper end of Knik Arm of Cook Inlet, in the general area of the Knik and Matanuska Rivers. The study area extends along the land-water interface from the Eklutna River across Knik Arm to Cottonwood Creek then inland to the 50-foot contour interval, except in the Jim Lake/Swan Lake area where the 100-foot contour interval is used. Part of this area is known locally as the Palmer Hayflats. Within the Hayflats is the Palmer Hayflats State Game Refuge, administered by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), and the Hayflats Recreation Area Special Land Use District, administered by the Matanuska-Susitna (Mat-Su) Borough. Federal and state coastal zone management legislation provides for designation of Areas Meriting Special Attention (AMSA). Most of the study area has been proposed for AMSA designation by the Mat-Su Borough (Matanuska-Susitna Borough Coastal Management Program, Phase 1 Completion Report, Maynard and Partch, and Woodward-Clyde Consultants, May 1981). We encourage such a designation by the Mat-Su Borough, along with cooperative development of a land management plan. Implementation could be through local ordinance and state and federal laws. The Knik Arm Wetlands are biologically important and sensitive to change; they will be influenced by population growth in adjoining areas. Wetlands protection is necessary to maintain the area's hydrological and biological integrity. Waters and wetlands within and adjacent to the area make a valuable contribution to anadromous fish production in Upper Cook Inlet. Additionally, these wetlands provide an important resting and feeding area for migratory birds which congregate in large numbers during spring and fall migration. Several species of birds remain through the summer and breed here. A large moose population overwinters in lowlands and on adjacent uplands. Moose also use the lowlands for calving and for summer habitat. The abundant fish and wildlife and high scenic quality attract large numbers of both consumptive and non-consumptive outdoor recreationists. Coastal wetlands are productive habitats; however, resource development often conflicts with resource protection. "Striking a balance between conservation and development of the wild and rich coastal resources ••• is the reason for coastal zone management" (Office of Coastal Management, 1979). The Knik Arm Wetlands perform several important functions including the following: a. Provide a major component of the food chain by producing bacterially enriched detritus; b. provide nesting, spawning, rearing, and resting habitat for fish and wildlife; Page 2 c. establish drainage characteristics, sedimentation and current patterns, salinity gradients, and flushing characteristics; d. shield other areas from wave action, erosion, or storm damage; e. serve as valuable storage areas for storm and flood waters and act as prime ground water recharge/discharge and water-holding areas; f. provide natural water filtration and purification, e.g. by acting as sediment accretion sites that reduce nutrient and sediment loads and increase oxygen content of waters which pass through them; and g. provide areas for outdoor recreation and aesthetic appreciation of the natural environment. Some development has occurred in the area and several projects have been proposed. More development proposals are expected as population increases in the Anchorage-Eklutna and Mat-Su Valley areas. Individual and cumulative project impacts could adversely affect wetland functions. Development of a management plan for the Knik Arm Wetlands will help ensure orderly development and resource protection. The emphasis should be on maintaining the area's natural qualities and the public benefits they provide. (2) Basis for Designation This AMSA proposal has been developed in accordance with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. It is consistent with the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), as amended. Section 305(b)(3) requires that the management program for each coastal state shall include an inventory and designation of areas of particular concern [i.e. AMSA] within the coastal zone. Further, Section 306(c)(9) states that: "Prior to granting apl?roval of a management program submitted by a coastal state, the Secretary Lof Commerce] shall find that the management program makes provision for procedures whereby specific areas may be designated for the purpose of preserving or restoring them for their conservation, recreational, ecological, or esthetic values." The Alaska Coastal Management Program defines an Area Meriting Special Attention as: "•.•a delineated geographic area within the coastal area which is sensitive to change or alteration and which, because .••a claim on the resources within the area delineated would preclude subsequent use of the resources to a conflicting or incompatible use, warrants special management attention, or which, because of its value to the general public, should be identified for current or future planning, protection or acquisition•••• " The Upper Knik Arm Wetlands possess the following features which qualify the area for AMSA designation (as defined in AS 46.40.210(1) and 6 AAC 80.160): Page 3 a. Unique, scarce, fragile, or vulnerable natural habitat; b. high natural productivity or essential habitat for living resources; c. substantial recreational value or opportunity; d. significant hazard due to storms, slides, floods, erosion, or settlement; e. special scientific values or opportunities, including those where ongoing research projects could be jeopardized by development of conflicting uses and activities; and f. essential area necessary to protect, maintain or replenish coastal land or resources including coastal floodplains and aquifer recharge areas. (3) Maps and Description of Geographical Location The proposed AMSA includes approximately 100 square miles, much of which is water (Figures 1 and 2). Virtually all the area is wetlands and flood prone lowlands (Figure 3). The FWS National Wetland Inventory Program has mapped wetlands in the area at a scale of 1:25,000. Because the objective of this proposed AMSA is to protect and manage valuable natural resources, the boundary is based on biophysical features. The Palmer Hayflats State Game Refuge is protected and managed by ADF&G; it is not recommended for AMSA designation. It is included within the AMSA boundary because its habitats and resources are similar to those elsewhere in the study area. (4) Area Description A. Dominant Physical Features The study area is drained primarily by the 75-mile long Matanuska River, with a drainage area of approximately 2,190 square miles, and by the 25-mile long Knik River with a drainage area of approximately 1,180 square miles. These rivers originate at the Matanuska and Knik Glaciers, respectively. Smaller clear water drainages include Eklutna River, Rabbit Slough-Wasilla Creek, and Cottonwood Creek. Peak flows of the Matanuska River come in mid-summer when glacier melt is greatest. Low flows occur in late winter when there is little runoff or glacier
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human Services Coordinated Transportation Plan for the Mat-Su Borough Area
    Human Services Coordinated Transportation Plan For the Mat-Su Borough Area Phase III – 2011-2016 Final Draft January 2011 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 Community Background .................................................................................................. 4 Coordinated Services Element ........................................................................................ 6 Coordination Working Group – Members (Table I) ................................................... 6 Inventory of Available Resources and Services (Description of Current Service / Public Transportation) .............................................................................................. 7 Description of Current Service / Other Transportation (Table II) .............................. 8 Assessment of Available Services – Public Transportation (Table III) ................... 13 Human Services Transportation Community Client Referral Form......................... 16 Population of Service Area: .................................................................................... 16 Annual Trip Destination Distribution – Current Service: ......................................... 19 Annual Trip Destination Distribution (Table V) ....................................................... 19 Vehicle Inventory .................................................................................................... 20 Needs Assessment ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chugach State Park Management Plan
    CHUGACH STATE PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN Adopted February 2016 CHUGACH STATE PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN Adopted February 2016 Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Cover photos courtesy of: Bull Moose Fight by: Donna Dewhurst Northern Lights Rainbow by: Larry Anderson Falls Creek- Turnagain by: Stephen Nickel Bird Ridge by: Wayne Todd Lupine At Chugach and Eklutna Lake by: Jeff Nelson Evening Beaver Ponds by: Jim Wood Credits and Acknowledgements Planning Team Monica Alvarez, Project Manager/Planner, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land & Water Amanda Hults, Planner, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land & Water Thomas Harrison, Chugach State Park Superintendent, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Matthew Wedeking, Chugach State Park Chief Ranger, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Ruth Booth, Publisher, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land & Water Plan Contributors Acknowledgements are gratefully due to the following Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation staff for their help in the planning process and contributions to the plan: Thomas Crockett, Kurt Hensel, Preston Kroes, Ian Thomas, and Keith Wilson- Former and Present Chugach State Park Rangers; Blaine Smith- Chugach State Park Specialist; Bill Evans- Former Landscape Architect; Lucille Baranko- Landscape Specialist; Claire Leclair- Chief of Field Operations; Ben Ellis- Director;
    [Show full text]
  • Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Residue Adjacent to the Waters of the Matanuska River in Palmer, Alaska Public Notice Draft
    Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 555 Cordova Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Residue Adjacent to the Waters of the Matanuska River in Palmer, Alaska Public Notice Draft July 2017 Draft TMDL for Residue Adjacent to the Matanuska River, AK July 2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 7 1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1 Location of TMDL Study Area ....................................................................................................... 9 1.2 Population ........................................................................................................................................ 13 1.3 Topography ...................................................................................................................................... 13 1.4 Land Use and Land Cover ............................................................................................................. 13 1.5 Soils and Geology ............................................................................................................................ 14 1.6 Climate .............................................................................................................................................. 17 1.7 Hydrology and Waterbody
    [Show full text]
  • Glenn Highway Milepost a 160 to Anchorage, AK
    www.themilepost.com Glenn Highway © The MILEPOST Key to mileage boxes To Wasilla miles/kilometres Glenn/Parks miles/kilometres from: Interchange A-Anchorage Parks Susitna Lake Map Location Exit to Parks J-19/31km F-Fairbanks Highway Hwy/Wasilla t G-Glennallen Glenn ® J-Junction Exit to Glenn Lake Hwy/Palmer Highway Louise P-Palmer Little Lake Louise t S-Seward w T-Tok To Principal Route Logged Key to Advertiser Palmer Lake Louise Road Services Paved Unpaved C -Camping J-0 t D -Dump Station Other Roads Logged d -Diesel A-160/257km G -Gas (reg., unld.) G-29/47km I -Ice Other Roads Scenic Byway L (map L -Lodging i T-168/271km t t t t M -Meals l continues Milepost A 160 e Refer to Log for Visitor Facilities P -Propane Old Man Lake previous C R -Car Repair (major) Exit to Glenn N page) a e Scale -Car Repair (minor) Hwy/Palmer r r l r Glenn i c 0 10 Miles h S -Store (grocery) e b i 0 10 Kilometres T -Telephone (pay) Highway v o n N62˚05’ i u a Cr. e 1 R C ch W146˚21’ To Anchorage n re R a t . o ek w C o l Eureka Summit r Mendeltna a e 3,322 ft./1,013m k v r N61˚56’ W147˚10’ i Cr. c R e i v i h R Tahneta Pass C 3,000 ft./914m g N61˚54’ W147˚18’ n i K t Tazlina Hicks Cr. a in t Mat-Su Valley Vicinity Lower h t Tahneta Lake o Anchorage, AK (see detailed map this section) Independence Mine Bonnie L.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Complete Southcentral Regional Booklet
    KNIK ARM 38 Remainder of Knik Arm Fresh Waters In the Knik Arm drainage, fishing for anadromous king salmon is not allowed, except during certain times of the year and in specific sections of the Little Susitna River and year-round at the Eklutna Tailrace. Palmer-Wasilla Zone Flowing Waters Palmer-Wasilla Zone flowing waters: • The Palmer-Wasilla Zone consists of all flowing waters inside a zone bounded on the north by Willow Creek, on the west by a line ½ mile east of the Susitna River, on the south by Cook Inlet and Knik Arm, and on the east by the Matanuska River and Moose Creek (but excluding Willow Creek, the Matanuska River, and Moose Creek): The Little Susitna River is excluded from the Palmer-Wasilla Zone . See regulations for the Little Susitna River on page 42 . • Daily limits are the same as listed on page 39 under General Regulations . OTHER SALMON General Regulations - Knik Arm ARCTIC CHAR/DOLLY VARDEN • In stocked lakes: 10 per day, 10 in possession in • In stocked lakes: 5 per day, 5 in possession . See pages combination with king salmon . See pages 88–89 for a 88–89 for a list of stocked lakes . Inclusive waters: Bounded on the north by (but not list of stocked lakes . including) Willow Creek, on the west by a line ½ mile • In other lakes and ponds and in all flowing waters: east of the Susitna River, on the south by Cook Inlet and • In other lakes and ponds and in all flowing waters: • 5 per day, 5 in possession, only 1 fish may be Knik Arm, and on the east by the Upper Susitna River • 16 inches or longer: 3 per day, 3 in possession, 12 inches or longer .
    [Show full text]
  • The Glenn Highway EMBODIES ALL SIX QUALITIES of a SCENIC BYWAY
    The Glenn Highway EMBODIES ALL SIX QUALITIES OF A SCENIC BYWAY. Scenic Historic Cultural Natural Recreational Archaeological This resource This resource Evidence and Those features of Outdoor Those offers a heightened encompasses expressions of the the visual recreational characteristics of visual experience legacies of the past customs or environment that activities are the scenic byways derived from the that are distinctly traditions of a are in a relatively directly associated corridor that are view of natural associated with distinct group of undisturbed state. with and physical evidence and man made physical elements people. Cultural These features dependent upon of historic or elements of the of the landscape, features include, predate the arrival the natural and prehistoric human visual environment whether natural or but are not limited of human cultural elements life or activity that of the scenic man made, that to crafts, music, populations and of the corridor’s are visible and byway corridor. are of such dance, rituals, may include landscape. capable of being The characteristics significance that festivals, speech, geological The recreational inventoried and of the landscape they educate the food, special formations, fossils, activities provide interpreted. The are strikingly viewer and stir an events, vernacular landform, water opportunities for scenic byway distinct and offer a appreciation of the architecture, etc. bodies, vegetation, active and passive corridor’s pleasing and most past. The historic and are currently and wildlife. There recreational archaeological memorable visual elements reflect practiced. The may be evidence of experiences. They interest, as experience. All the actions of cultural qualities of human activity but include, but are not identified through elements of the people and may the corridor could the natural features limited to downhill ruins, artifacts, landscape – include buildings, highlight one or reveal minimal skiing, rafting, structural remains landform, water, settlement more significant disturbances.
    [Show full text]
  • Signature Page TIDAL ESTUARY MORPHODYNAMICS of the KNIK
    Tidal Estuary Morphodynamics of the Knik Arm Item Type Report Authors Lewis, Steven E. Publisher University of Alaska Anchorage Download date 25/09/2021 15:25:58 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/5308 Signature Page TIDAL ESTUARY MORPHODYNAMICS OF THE KNIK ARM – ALASKA By Steven E. Lewis, P.E., B.S. RECOMMENDED: Thomas M. Ravens, Ph.D. Professor, College of Engineering Advisor He Liu, Ph.D. Professor, College of Engineering Advisory Committee Robert J. Lang, Ph.D. Professor and Chair, College of Engineering Advisory Committee Kenrick Mock, Ph.D. Associate Dean and Professor, College of Engineering APPROVED: David Yesner, Ph.D. Associate Dean, Graduate School Date TIDAL ESTUARY MORPHODYNAMICS OF THE KNIK ARM - ALASKA Title Page A PROJECT Presented to the Faculty of the University of Alaska Anchorage in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF CIVIL ENGINEERING By Steven E. Lewis, P.E., B.S. Anchorage, Alaska May 2015 iii Abstract A three-dimensional unsteady flow numerical model was developed to study sediment transport due to tidal circulation within Knik Arm, a dynamic well mixed macro-tidal sub-estuary of Cook Inlet in Alaska. The model was developed to gain a better understanding of the mechanisms that are creating the Point MacKenzie Shoal, located approximately 4 kilometers south of Port MacKenzie. Hydrodynamic conditions within the estuary are very complex in that ebb-and-flood tides, freshwater mixing, and wetting/drying of tidal mud flats significantly effects sediment transport within the estuary. A Mike 3 numerical model was applied to simulate the sediment transport within the estuary under the action of tidal currents in the vicinity of the shoal.
    [Show full text]
  • Knik Arm Salmon Ecology Integrated Research Plan
    Knik Arm Anadromous Fish Study Designs Knik Arm Salmon Ecology Integrated Research Plan Prepared for: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Conservation Planning Assistance 605 W. 4th Ave Anchorage, AK 99501 Prepared by: HDR Alaska, Inc. 2525 C Street, Suite 305 Anchorage, AK 99503 January 26, 2010 Knik Arm Anadromous Fish Study Designs Knik Arm Salmon Ecology Integrated Research Plan Prepared for: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Conservation Planning Assistance 605 W. 4th Ave Anchorage, AK 99501 Preparers: James Brady – HDR Alaska Amanda Prevel-Ramos – HDR Alaska Scott Prevatte – HDR Alaska Jon Houghton, Ph.D. – Pentec Environmental Bridget Brown – HDR Alaska January 26, 2010 DISCLAIMER STATEMENT This report was prepared under contract to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the USFWS make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for use, or the results of such use of any information contained herein. The views and opinions of authors expressed in this document do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or the USFWS. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Knik Arm Salmon Ecology Integrated Research Plan Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A, Northern Region
    APPENDIX A: NORTHERN REGION This appendix includes maps and narrative that summarize the results of the Chugach State Park Access Inventory for the Northern Region of Chugach State Park. Access is categorized as Improved Access, Unimproved Access, Traditional Access, and Potential Access. Where a particular access point presents particular challenges or problems, it is noted as being problematic. All access considered in this inventory is depicted on maps included at the end of the appendix. Access is highlighted in yellow and includes access points and road and pedestrian corridors. Parcels of Concern are highlighted in pink and represent areas where platting of roads and easements to the Park boundary can provide future Neighborhood Access. Recommendations and References are included for each site when appropriate. Hunter Creek, Pioneer Ridge Area (Map p. 31) N1 Hunter Creek Traditional Access, problematic. Hunter Creek is located near the end of Knik River Road, in the vicinity of the bridge crossing Hunter Creek or in T16N, R 3E, Section 25 to the west at approximately Mile 9.6 of Knik River Road. The west side of the creek has a steep rock wall and access on this side of the creek apparently is via Azuree Avenue through a private parcel where the owner is reportedly charging users to access through his land. An existing trail runs through cottonwoods and a lightly forested area on the east side of the creek. Elevations initially on the west side are fairly steep. This area is used for light hunting in the fall with some use by mountain climbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Matanuska River Watershed Plan
    1 Matanuska River Watershed Plan Prepared by: U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Palmer Field Office 1700 E. Bogard, Suite 203 Wasilla, AK 99654 JUNE 2006 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Approval of the Plan Acknowledgements Planning Signatures and Initiating Government Letters of Approval TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PLANNING FRAMEWORK 1.1 Background and historical information 1.2 Studies and Reports: past and present 1.3 Purpose of the Plan 1.4 Limitations 2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION 2.1 Natural Environment 2.1.1 Geography & Climate 2.1.2 Soils 2.1.3 Hydrology and Geohydrology 2.1.4 Biology 2.2 Human Environment 2.2.1 Land Use and Demographics 2.3 Tributaries 2.3.1 Overview 2.4 Water Resources 2.4.1 Water Quality 2.4.2 Water Quantity 3.0 RESOURCE CONCERNS 3.1 Critical Residential Area of concern 3.2 Habitat Conditions 4.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Structural 4.2 Non-structural 5.0 COST BENEFIT COMPARISON 6.0 APPENDICES (Figures & Tables) 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The planning team consisted of NRCS staff with input from the Matanuska River Watershed Coalition group. The planning effort is the result of over ten years of ongoing erosion impacted-structures and public pressure to address the loss property. The following people participated in the Watershed Planning process. Initiating Governments Matanuska Susitna Borough (MSB) NRCS Watershed Coalition Team Author: Michelle Schuman, USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, District Conservationist, Palmer Field Office Review:
    [Show full text]
  • Chugach Access Plan
    CHUGACH ACCESS PLAN Public Hearing Draft July 2012 Chugach Access Plan Public Hearing Draft July 2012 Municipality of Anchorage With Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation 1 Table of Contents 2 3 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 4 Background and Overview ................................................................................................. 1 5 Purpose and Scope .............................................................................................................. 2 6 Project Goal ........................................................................................................................ 2 7 Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 2 8 PLANNING EFFORT AND PROCESS .................................................................................. 3 9 Planning Process ................................................................................................................. 3 10 Planning Effort and Criteria for Access Recommendations ............................................... 4 11 How This Plan Relates to Other Plans or Regulatory Systems .......................................... 5 12 ISSUES ..................................................................................................................................... 6 13 Funding Constraints ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Susitna River Delta As Calving Ground: Evidence Form Observation
    The Susitna River Delta as a calving ground: Tamara McGuire1, Amber Stephens1, Brad Goetz 1,2 Evidence from observation of a Cook Inlet beluga birth 1. LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc. 2000 West International Airport Road, St C1 and the 2005-2015 seasonal and Anchorage, Alaska, USA 99502 [email protected], [email protected] geographic patterns of neonaten 2. Kincaid Elementary School, Anchorage, Alaska. occurrence in Upper Cook Inlet. .. ·.. Little Susitna . ,· River Background . .. Birth Observed .:- Sitsi/tia._. RrJ~r The scientific literature has not identified if distinct calving grounds and calving ':·:·:::·:-_.:::· Delta·:: -::-:.. ·· .,. ···· ·· · . :: ·: ...... ..· ••· ,_.. :_ ......: .-:::.·-: ::.- -:-.·· ..... :-: ·--.. ...... :-- ·_ ..·. :-:-:_..- ·.: ·:··- :" : . ·.. _-' .-_. .-._.:-: _._· : ._.-_: ::- _: _: __::·: . :·.. :.-_:.·_ ·. ·.. - ::·/ .. -.·· :·- ·. .... ' . We observed a CIBW birth on July 20, 2015 in the Susitna River Delta, . :··. .·:: . ::·.:··:- .... • .·: ·.···.-... ... ..-.·:. ....... •• seasons exist for endangered Cook Inlet beluga whales (CIBW), as they do with other ...,- ... -.-.-·. .. ..·. KnikArm ·:·-···.·.· . ' .- :_::_·.·,.·. ·.·, ..•_. .:·-. -:· :, ·. -. '• .. : ... -.-;-· .. .. ··-:::-· ._._. ...... -.·: ..... ·.. ·.-·.::-. Upper Cook Inlet Alaska. beluga populations. Specific calving grounds or seasonal calving periods for CIBW . .. have not been designated because births in the wild have not been previously _'-_: :'": .-·.-·.:.:,:,- • The birth took place during low tide, in shallow waters (~1.3m)
    [Show full text]