Alaska Park Science Anchorage, Alaska Connections to Natural and Cultural Resource Studies in Alaska’S National Parks
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
National Park Service U.S. Department of Interior Alaska Support Office Alaska Park Science Anchorage, Alaska Connections to Natural and Cultural Resource Studies in Alaska’s National Parks Summer 2003 Table of Contents Return to Glacier Bay ________________________ 5 The Wales/Deering Subsistence Producer Analysis Project __________________ 13 Chukchi Cape Krusenstern Bear Human Interactions at Glacier Bay Sea National Monument National Park and Preserve: Conflict Risk Assessment __________________ 21 Deering Wales Red Light District Ethnohistory Bering Land Bridge in Seward, Alaska __________________________ 27 National Preserve Unlocking the Secrets of K A Lake Clark Sockeye Salmon ________________ 33 Norton Sound A S Pioneer Arctic Archeologist L J. Louis Giddings____________________________ 39 A Science News ____________________________ 44-51 Glacier Bay Alaska Park Science Lake Clark National Park National Park and Preserve http://www.nps.gov/akso/AKScience2003spring.pdf and Preserve Editor: Monica Shah Seward Copy Editor: Thetus Smith Kenai Fjords National Park Project Lead: Robert Winfree, Regional Science Advisor, email: [email protected] Park Science Journal Board: Ted Birkedal, Team Leader for Cultural Resources Bristol Bay Alex Carter, Team Manager for Biological Resources Team Gulf of Alaska Joy Geiselman, Deputy Chief, Biological Science Office USGS Alaska Science Center John Quinley, Assistant Regional Director for Communications Jane Tranel, Public Affairs Specialist Ralph Tingey, Associate Regional Director for Resources and Education Robert Winfree, Regional Science Advisor and Chair of Journal Board Funded By: The Natural Resources Challenge Initiative Printed with soy based ink Produced By: Parks Featured in this Issue Sharing Alaska’s Natural and Cultural Heritage Cover photograph © Randall Davis 2 About the Authors Herbert Anungazuk is an anthropologist for the Alaska Support Office, National Park Service. James L. Bodkin is a research wildlife biologist for the Alaska Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey. Don Callaway is a cultural anthropologist for the Alaska Support Office, National Park Service. Terry D. DeBruyn is a wildlife biologist for the Alaska Support Office, National Park Service. Tania Lewis is a wildlife biologist for Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve. Rachel Mason is a cultural anthropologist for the Alaska Support Office, National Park Service. Steven Partridge is a wildlife biologist for the Alaska Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey. Becky Saleeby is an archeologist for the Alaska Support Office, National Park Service. Tom Smith is a wildlife biologist for the Alaska Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey. Carol Ann Woody is a biologist for the Alaska Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey. A radiotagged sockeye salmon ready to reveal the Rusty Yerxa is a writer-editor for Glacier Bay final location of its spawning National Park and Preserve. destination. Because salmon stop eating on their spawning migration, scientists can insert a battery-sized (AA) tag in their empty stomachs. Photograph courtesy of U.S. Geological Survey See story page 33 3 4 Return to Glacier Bay By James L. Bodkin recolonizing Glacier Bay. This provides the Pacific Ocean, the sound of sea otters opportunity to describe the marine commu- foraging could no longer be heard. This was Introduction nity, as it exists before sea otters exert their the result ofa commercial fur harvest that A sound unheard for centuries is once influence, and to document how the commu- began about 1750 and ended in 1900 with again resonating above the turbid waters of nity changes as sea otters become established. the near extinction ofthe species(Kenyon Glacier Bay. The sound is one ofrock ham- Because Glacier Bay is large, it will take many 1969). The first efforts to conserve sea otters mering against clam in rapid-fire succession years for sea otters to reoccupy all habitats occurred in 1911. At that time sea otters and it signals the return ofthe sea otterin the bay. The opportunity to compare received their first protection under the (Enhydra lutris) to its former habitats in similar habitats in Glacier Bay, both with International Fur Treaty, and likely num- Southeast Alaska. The sound also signals the and without sea otters, and before and after bered just several hundred animals scat- beginning ofa process that will, with little sea otter colonization, provides an experi- tered in 11 populations between central doubt, result in profound and persistent mentally powerful design. This can then California and Russia, with most individuals changes in the marine communities of allow researchers to assign cause based on occurring in the Aleutian Islands. No sea Glacier Bay. Some ofthese changes areobserved change (Figure 1). In addition, the otter populations persisted between Prince predictable, while others will be unantici- protected waters ofGlacier Bay provide a William Sound in Alaska and the Big Sur Figure 1: Sea otters are in the first stages pated. Without understanding the range of laboratory that is, and will likely remain, coast ofCalifornia. During the twentieth of recolonizing Glacier Bay. The red circles effects ofsea otters, management ofmany relatively unaffected by human activities century, extant sea otter populations represent subtidal clam sites. marine resources may be severely impaired such as contamination, fishing, logging, and exhibited a general pattern ofrecovery, with for decades to come. Fortunately, because mining, which could potentially confound growth rates from about 5% to 13% per sea otters are easily observed and their prey the interpretation ofecological study. It year and displaying concurrent patterns easily studied, methods and approaches to was under consideration ofthese attributes ofrange expansion (Bodkin et al. 1999). studying sea otters and their ecology are that we began our work nearly ten years ago The next efforts to conserve and aid in perhaps better developed than for any other to understand the effects of sea otters on the recovery ofsea otter populations began marine mammal (Riedman and Estes 1990). the structure and function of near-shore in 1965 and consisted oftranslocations For several reasons Glacier Bay National marine communities in Glacier Bay. from Amchitka Island and Prince William Park and Preserve provides an excellent Sound in Alaska to Oregon, Washington, laboratory for studying the effects of sea The Decline and Recovery British Columbia, and Southeast Alaska Sea Otter photos courtesy of Randall Davis © 2003 otters on marine communities. First and At the end ofthe nineteenth century(Jameson et al 1982). Between 1965 and Kelp Forest photo courtesy of U.S. Geological Survey foremost, sea otters are in the early stages of along nearly the entire shore ofthe North 1969, 412 sea otters arrived at several loca- 5 Return to Glacier Bay Photo courtesyofU.S.GeologicalSurvey Where sea otters are present, they effectively limit the abundance of sea urchins by actively consuming individuals larger than about one inch in diameter. As a result of this predation on urchins, which limits urchin size, abundance, and mobility, urchins do not have a large grazing effect and Figure 4: Urchin barren. consequently kelp forests flourish. 1974, Simenstad et al. 1978, Kvitek and Oliver 1988, Kvitek et al. 1992). Probably tions in Southeast Alaska, including areas the best example ofsea otter effects comes adjacent to Glacier Bay National Park and from the description of sea otters as eco- Preserve in Cross Sound. Although surveys logical “keystone” species in kelp forest ofsea otter populations in Southeast Alaska communities ofthe coastal North Pacific were infrequent, results through at least Ocean (Estes and Duggins 1995). Within 1988 indicated that the population was these shallow rocky habitats occur several increasing about 20% annually with simul- species ofsea urchin(Stronglycentrotus sp.), taneous expansion ofrange(Pitcher 1989). marine herbivores that actively graze on Figure 2: Since 1993, sea otter populations have increased dramatically. By 1988 sea otters were common in Cross algae. This includes the brown algae that Photo courtesyofU.S.GeologicalSurvey Sound and immigration into Icy Straits was often forms the conspicuous and produc- evident. In 1993 the first sea otters were tive kelp-forests that exist along many observed in Glacier Bay, although annual coastlines. Where sea otters are present, surveys indicate permanent residence was they effectively limit the abundance of sea not established until 1998. Since that time, urchins by actively consuming individuals population growth in Glacier Bay has been larger than about one inch in diameter. phenomenal. It is almost certainly exceed- As a result ofthis predation on urchins, ing the reproductive potential ofthewhich limits urchin size, abundance, and species, and thus likely representing contri- mobility, urchins do not have a large butions from both births and immigration grazing effect and consequently kelp forests from outside the bay. (Figure 2). flourish. In turn, kelp forests provide habitat, refuge, and forage for a complex A “Keystone” Species community ofinvertebrates, fishes, birds, Our understanding ofthe role sea otters and mammals. A high biomass ofkelps and will play in modifying the Glacier Bay a diverse assemblage ofanimals reliant on marine ecosystem will benefit from previ- the kelp forest characterize the kelp forest Figure 3: A diverse assemblage of animals reliant on the kelp forest