DOCSLIB.ORG

Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (AMNWR) Would Not Be Indicative of Weather Patterns for the Entire Complex

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ANN UAL I~ARRATI VE REPORT Calendar Year 1982 ALAS KA MARITIME NATIONAL WILDLIF E REFUGE Homer, Alas ka ALEUTIAN ISLANDS UNIT Adak, Alaska ALAS!\.P_ l'tA.RITIME NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Homer, Alaska ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 1982 library U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1011 E. Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99503_ U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM Refuge Manager John L. Martin Assistant Refuge Manager Tom J. Early Refuge Biologist Edgar P . Bailey - •• I-: f ~ :!-!anager. GS - 13 . EOD 12-21-81, PFT J• Eo~ar P. ba~. Refuge Biologist. GS-ll , EOD 10- 01-81, PFT Review and Approvals 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. HIGHLIGHTS 4 B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS 5 C. LAND ACQUISITION 1. Fee Title. .Nothing to Report 2. Easement •• .Nothing to Report 3. Other ••••• • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5 D. PLANNING l. Master Plan ............••...............•.........•.•............. 9 2. Management Plan . •••••••••...•••••..•.••.••••...•••.•.••.....•..• 9 3. Public Participation •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 4. Compliance with Environmental Mandates •••••••••• Nothing to Report s. Research and Investigations ••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••• 9 J E. ADMINISTRATION 1. Personnel •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• l2 2. Youth Programs •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 3. Other Manpower Programs ••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Re·port 4. Volunteers Program •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report s. Funding . ..........•.•.••...••...........•••....•...•.•......••. 13 6. Safety ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• l4 7. Technical Assistance •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 8. Other I terns • ...•.••••.••...•••••....•....•.....•.••...•.....•.. 14 F. HABITAT MANAGEMENT ,1. General •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• l4 "-• Wetlands ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••...••. Nothing to Report 3. Forests ........................................................ 14 4. Croplands ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report s. Grasslands •..••..•.•••.••••.••••.••.••.•••.••••• Nothing to Report 6. Other Habitats •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 7. Grazing • •••.••..•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•.•.. 14 8. Haying •..••.••••••••••••••.•••••.••••.•••••••••• Nothing to Report 9. Fire Management ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 10. Pest Control •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 11. Water Rights •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report \ ) 12. Wilderness and Special Areas ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• l8 13. WPA Easement Monitoring ••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 2 -) G. WILDLIFE 1. Wildlife Diversity •••••••••••••••••••• .Nothing to Report 2. Endangered and/or Threatened Species •• • ••••••••••••••• 2 0 3. Waterfowl ...•...••..••.••••.••.••..... • ••••••••••••••• 2 0 4. Marsh and Water Birds •••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 5. Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns, and Allied Species ••• Nothing to Report 6. Raptors •....•••........••.•..••.••... • .Nothing to Report 7. Other Migratory Birds •••••••••••••••• • ••••••••••••••••• 20 8. Game Mammals ••••••••••••••••••• .Nothing to Report 9. Marine Mammals ••••.••••.••••••••••••• . .•......•..... 23 10. Other Resident Wildlife •••••••••••••• . .•............ 23 11. Fishery Resources ••.•.•••••••••••••••• ............... 23 12. Wildlife Propagation and Stocking ••••• • ••• Nothing to Report 13. Surplus Animal Disposal ••••••••••••••• •••• Nothing to Report 14. Scientific Collections •••••••••••••• • •••••••••••••••••• 2 3 15. Animal Control •••••••••••••••• • ••••• Nothing to Report 16. Marking and Banding •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 17. Disease Prevention and Control ••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report H. PUBLIC USE 1. General ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 26 2. Outdoor Classrooms Students •••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 3. Outdoor Classrooms Teachers •••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report ) 4. Interpretive Foot Trails ••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 5. Interpretive Tour Routes ••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 6. Interpretive Exhibits/Demonstrations ••••••••••• Nothing to Report 7. Other Interpretive Programs •••••••.••••••••••••••••.•••••••••• 26 8. Hunting .•.•••....•...•••••••.••.•.....•.••...•• Nothing to Report 9. Fishing ••.•••••••••••••••••••.•...••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 10. Trapping •••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••• Nothing to Report 11. Wildlife Observation ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 12. Other Wildlife Oriented Recreation ••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 13. Camping •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 14. Picnicking............................... ... Nothing to Report 15. Off-Road Vehicling ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 16. Other Non-Wildlife Oriented Recreation ••••••••• Nothing to Report 17. Law Enforcement ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 27 18. Cooperating Associations ••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 19. Concessions •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report I. EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 1. New Construction ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 2. Rehabilitation ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 3. Major Maintenance •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 4. Equipment Utilization and Replacement.... • •••••••••••••••• 27 5. Communications Systems. • •••••••••• Nothing to Report 6. Energy Conservation •••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 7. Other •••.•••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report J. OTHER ITEMS 1. Cooperative Programs ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 2. Items of Interest •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Nothing to Report 3. Credit •...•...................................•.............. 27 K. FEEDBACK 1. Regional Office.............................. ................. 27 ) ) 4 A. Highlights Closure of Homer Office indicated St. Matthew Island surveyed 1982 Vessel Charter a great success! ) ) 5 B. Climatic Conditions Obviously, any one weather data source for the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (AMNWR) would not be indicative of weather patterns for the entire complex. The only realistic way to gather pertinent weather data is to utilize weather data from each specific unit at one or more locations. Presently we receive weather data from the National Weather Service (NWS) in Homer and from a remote, satellite relayed, meteorological station located on St. Matthew Island in the Bering Sea. This station was installed and operated by an environmental consultant firm from California for use by several oil companies in that area. The station transmits air temperature, barometric pressure, wind direction and speed, and north and east wind components. This is valuable information for the NWS and oil companies, as little weather data are available from this portion of the world. Listed below are climatological data from five sources scattered across the AMNWR (excluding the AIU). This table presents the means and extremes fer temperatur~. prpcjpit~tion, and wind; however, coastal areas are ·notorious for localized weather patterns. St. Kotzebue Matthew Cold Ba;y: Homer Ketchikan Temperature(oKl High (Date) 79(06) 54(08) 66(7/27) 82(6/26) ) Low (Date) -28(01) 10(03) -7(2/15) 0(1/22) Ave. for Yr. 23.5 37.6 36.8 43.7 Departure from Average +2.6 -3.7 +1.48 -2.5 Precipitation Total from Yr. 10.64 43.79 19.71 87.49 Departure from Average +1.69 +10.56 -3.37 -74.78 Wind (mph) Ave. for Year 17.8 8.7 Max.* (date) 60(11) 58(01' 11) 31(10) *Maximum wind speed for 1 minute period. c. Land Acquisition 3. Other The AMNWR contains about 3.1 million acres of land consisting of about 2, 500 is lands, is lets, and headlands which are used by large numbers of marine birds and mammals. Some key wildlife areas were ) 6 not included in the refuge because of Native or State selections or other private property. Also, there are some areas included in the refuge which have little or no value for wildlife. Since land exchanges wi 11 be on-going for several years, the refuge should attempt to gain some of these critical wildlife areas in exchange for less desirable lands we own. A list of islands suggested for exchange is given in the 1981 Refuge Narrative Report. The Regional Office Realty Division has not yet completed sets of land status maps for the AMNWR. We did receive AMNWR boundary maps from the Washington Office, but even these contain errors. We must check with the Realty Division when issuing Special Use Permits to verify current land status. Section 1417 of ANILCA ratified the "Pribilof Terms and Conditions" and authorized appropriation of funds for: (1) Purchase by the USFWS of a minimum of 8,000 acres and 9,000 acres maximum of seabird habitat, including one section of representative habitat each on St. Paul and 5t. George and all of Walrus and Otter Islands, for $5,200,000. (2) Exchange of the subsurface estate of the 8,000 acres with the Aleut Regional Corporation. (3) Lease of one-acre administrative sites on St. George and St. ) Paul islands for use by the USFWS as headquarters and administrative sites for the Pribilof Islands subunit of the AMNWR. (4) Cooperative study of transportation, facilities, and cultural and natural resources interpretation programs. In 1982, $1,920,000 was appropriated to purchase approximately 3,000 ac. of habitat. This includes
Recommended publications
  • Mercury Concentrations in Multiple Tissues of Kittlitz's Murrelets (Brachyramphus Brevirostris)

    Mercury Concentrations in Multiple Tissues of Kittlitz's Murrelets (Brachyramphus Brevirostris)

    Marine Pollution Bulletin xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Pollution Bulletin journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul Mercury concentrations in multiple tissues of Kittlitz's murrelets (Brachyramphus brevirostris) ⁎ Leah A. Kenneya, , Robb S.A. Kalera, Michelle L. Kisslingb, Alexander L. Bondc, Collin A. Eagles-Smithd a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, AK, USA b U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Juneau, AK, USA c Ardenna Research, Potton, Sandy, Bedfordshire SG19 2QA, United Kingdom d U.S. Geological Survey, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Corvallis, OR, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Mercury (Hg) is a non-essential, toxic metal that is distributed worldwide. Mercury biomagnifies in food webs Blood and can threaten the health of top predators such as seabirds. The Kittlitz's murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris) Eggshell is a seabird endemic to Alaska and the Russian Far East and is a species of conservation concern in the region. We Excrement determined Hg concentrations in eggshells, guano, blood, and feathers of Kittlitz's murrelets sampled from four Guano locations in Alaska. Mercury concentrations in eggshells, guano, and blood were low compared to other seabird Feather species. Mean Hg concentrations of breast feathers from Adak Island and Glacier Bay were significantly greater Seabird than those from Agattu Island or Icy Bay. Two Kittlitz's murrelets at Glacier Bay and one Kittlitz's murrelet at Adak Island had Hg concentrations above those associated with
  • Miles, A.K., M.A. Ricca, R.G. Anthony, and J.A. Estes. 2009

    Miles, A.K., M.A. Ricca, R.G. Anthony, and J.A. Estes. 2009

    Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 28, No. 8, pp. 1643–1654, 2009 ᭧ 2009 SETAC Printed in the USA 0730-7268/09 $12.00 ϩ .00 ORGANOCHLORINE CONTAMINANTS IN FISHES FROM COASTAL WATERS WEST OF AMUKTA PASS, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA, USA A. KEITH MILES,*† MARK A. RICCA,† ROBERT G. ANTHONY,‡ and JAMES A. ESTES§ †U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Davis Field Station, 1 Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, California 95616 ‡U.S. Geological Survey, Oregon Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, 104 Nash Hall, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 §Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Center for Ocean Health, 100 Schaffer Road, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95060, USA (Received 2 October 2008; Accepted 6 March 2009) Abstract—Organochlorines were examined in liver and stable isotopes in muscle of fishes from the western Aleutian Islands, Alaska, in relation to islands or locations affected by military occupation. Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus), Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis), and rock greenling (Hexagrammos lagocephalus) were collected from nearshore waters at contemporary (decommissioned) and historical (World War II) military locations, as well as at reference locations. Total (⌺) polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) dominated the suite of organochlorine groups (⌺DDTs, ⌺chlordane cyclodienes, ⌺other cyclodienes, and ⌺chlo- rinated benzenes and cyclohexanes) detected in fishes at all locations, followed by ⌺DDTs and ⌺chlordanes; dichlorodiphenyldi- chloroethylene (p,pЈDDE) composed 52 to 66% of ⌺DDTs by species. Organochlorine concentrations were higher or similar in cod compared to halibut and lowest in greenling; they were among the highest for fishes in Arctic or near Arctic waters. Organ- ochlorine group concentrations varied among species and locations, but ⌺PCB concentrations in all species were consistently higher at military locations than at reference locations.
  • Prehistoric Aleut Influence at Port Moller

    Prehistoric Aleut Influence at Port Moller

    12 'i1 Pribilof lis. "' Resale for so 100 150 200 ·o oO Miles .,• t? 0 Not Fig. 1. Map of the Alaska Peninsula and Adjacent Areas. The dotted line across the Peninsula represents the Aleut boundary as determined by Petroff. Some of the important archaeological sites are marked as follows: 1) Port Moller, 2) Amaknak Island-Unalaska Bay, 3) Fortress or Split Rock, 4) Chaluka, 5) Chirikof Island, 6) Uyak, 7) Kaflia, 8) Pavik-Naknek Drainage, 9) Togiak, 10) Chagvan Bay, 11) Platinum, 12) Hooper Bay. PREHISTORIC ALEUT INFLUENCES AT PORT MOLLER, ALASKA 1 by Allen P. McCartney Univ. of Wisconsin Introduction Recent mention has been made of the Aleut influences at the large prehistoric site at Port Moller, the only locality known archaeologically on the southwestern half of the Alaska Penin­ sula. Workman ( 1966a: 145) offers the following summary of the Port Moller cultural affinities: Although available published material from the Aleutians is scarce and the easternmost Aleutians in particular have been sadly neglected, it is my opinion that the strongest affinitiesResale of the Port Moller material lie in this direction. The prevalence of extended burial and burial association with ocher at Port Moller corresponds most closely with the burial practices at the Chaluka site on Umnak Island. Several of the more diagnostic projectile points have Aleutian affinities as do the tanged knives and, possibly,for the side-notched projectile point. Strong points of correspondence, particularly in the burial practices and the stone technology, lead me to believe that a definite Aleut component is represented at the site. Data currently available will not allow any definitive statement as to whether or not there are other components represented at the site as well.
  • Resource Utilization in Unalaska, Aleutian Islands, Alaska

    Resource Utilization in Unalaska, Aleutian Islands, Alaska

    RESOURCE UTILIZATION IN UNALASKA, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA Douglas W. Veltre, Ph. D. Mary J. Veltre, B.A. Technical Paper Number 58 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence October 23, 1982 Contract 824790 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report would not have been possible to produce without the generous support the authors received from many residents of Unalaska. Numerous individuals graciously shared their time and knowledge, and the Ounalashka Corporation,. in particular, deserves special thanks for assistance with housing and transportation. Thanks go too to Linda Ellanna, Deputy Director of the Division of Subsistence, who provided continuing support throughout this project, and to those individuals who offered valuable comments on an earlier draft of this report. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. ii Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION . 1 Purpose ..................... 1 Research objectives ............... 4 Research methods 6 Discussion of rese~r~h'm~tho~oio~y' ........ ...... 8 Organization of the report ........... 10 2 BACKGROUNDON ALEUT RESOURCE UTILIZATION . 11 Introduction ............... 11 Aleut distribuiiin' ............... 11 Precontact resource is: ba;tgr;ls' . 12 The early postcontact period .......... 19 Conclusions ................... 19 3 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND. 23 Introduction ........................... 23 The precontact'plrioi . 23 The Russian period ............... 25 The American period ............... 30 Unalaska community profile. ........... 37 Conclusions ................... 38 4 THE NATURAL SETTING ...............
  • Assessment of Alaska Reindeer Populations and Range Conditions

    Assessment of Alaska Reindeer Populations and Range Conditions

    Paper presented at The First Arctic Ungulate Conference, Nuuk, Greenland, 3-8. September, 1991. Assessment of Alaska reindeer populations and range conditions J. D. Swanson1 and M. H. W. Barker2 1 USDA Soil Conservation Service, 201 E. 9th Avenue, Suite 300, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, U.S.A. 2 Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alaska Anchorage, Alaska 99508, U.S.A. Abstract: Populations of reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) have fluctated greatly since their introduction to Alaska in 1891. In the 1930s, reported numbers exceeded 600,000. Presently, 38,000 reindeer graze 6.2 million ha of rangeland and woodland in Western Alaska (from 66°54'N to 52°07'N latitude). Condition of winter range producing fruticose lichens (Cladina rangiferina, Cladina arbuscula, Cladina stellaris, Cetraria cucullata, Cetra- ria islandica) is of major concern. Monitoring programs have been established for vegetation, fire, reindeer and wildlife. Reindeer have overgrazed lichen resources on some Bering Sea Islands. Wildfires have had the greatest impact on lichen range depletion on the mainland. Overgrazing has been a problem in localized areas. Moose (AIces alces) and muskox (Ovibos moschatus) rarely contribute to major lichen depletion. 60-80% of the mainland and 5-30% of most island winter lichen ranges are presently estimated to be in good to excel• lent ecological condition. Procedures for assessing condition of the lichen ranges are being further refined. Keywords: Alaska, winter, pastures, lichens, population dynamics, sampling techniques Rangifer, 12 (1): 33-43 Introduction Siberian reindeer herders were originally Sheldon Jackson, General Agent of Education brought to instruct local natives in reindeer in Alaska, toured the northern coasts of Siberia husbandry and herding techniques (Brickey, and Alaska in 1890.
  • Andrew A. Schaffner; Stephen B. Mathewsf Judith E

    Andrew A. Schaffner; Stephen B. Mathewsf Judith E

    Andrew A. Schaffner; Stephen B. Mathewsf Judith E. Zeh* April 21, 1994 Abstract From June 1985 through June 1992 regular aerial surveys over Southeast Alaska, the Gulf of Alaska, and Aleutian Islands were conducted to monitor the distribution and abundance of Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus). Furthermore, during 1992 the use of repetitive aerial surveys was introduced to study survey variability. The purposes of our present study were two-fold: (1) To investigate alternative statistical procedures for estimating population trend rates from aerial survey counts, and (2) to apply these procedures to the 1989-92 counts. We focused on 1989-92 because of the more abundant data for that period and to determine the most recent direction of population abundance relative to the well-documented steep decline prior to 1989. We concluded that parametric bootstrapping was the most appropriate interval estimation procedure. For this procedure the 90% confidence interval for the rate of change between the 1989 and 1992 Kenai-Kiska Recovery Plan trend site counts was (-10.19%, 2.62%). For +lJrookery and haul-out sites within the Kenai-Kiska region for which counts were made for both 1989 and 1992, the 90% confidence interval was (-6.20%, 6.81%). For sites outside the Kenai-Kiska region, the 90% confidence interval for the rate of change between 1989 and 1992 was (-37.92%, -6.93%). The parametric bootstrap procedure had the weakness of including data from only pairs of years; thus, 1990-91 information was excluded from the above interval estimates. Consequently, we investigated the use of both generalized linear modeling (GLM) and generalized estimating equations (GEE) as tools for analyzing all four years' data together.
  • Resource Utilization in Atka, Aleutian Islands, Alaska

    Resource Utilization in Atka, Aleutian Islands, Alaska

    RESOURCEUTILIZATION IN ATKA, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA Douglas W. Veltre, Ph.D. and Mary J. Veltre, B.A. Technical Paper Number 88 Prepared for State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Contract 83-0496 December 1983 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To the people of Atka, who have shared so much with us over the years, go our sincere thanks for making this report possible. A number of individuals gave generously of their time and knowledge, and the Atx^am Corporation and the Atka Village Council, who assisted us in many ways, deserve particular appreciation. Mr. Moses Dirks, an Aleut language specialist from Atka, kindly helped us with Atkan Aleut terminology and place names, and these contributions are noted throughout this report. Finally, thanks go to Dr. Linda Ellanna, Deputy Director of the Division of Subsistence, for her support for this project, and to her and other individuals who offered valuable comments on an earlier draft of this report. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . e . a . ii Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION . e . 1 Purpose ........................ Research objectives .................. Research methods Discussion of rese~r~h*m~t~odoio~y .................... Organization of the report .............. 2 THE NATURAL SETTING . 10 Introduction ........... 10 Location, geog;aih;,' &d*&oio&’ ........... 10 Climate ........................ 16 Flora ......................... 22 Terrestrial fauna ................... 22 Marine fauna ..................... 23 Birds ......................... 31 Conclusions ...................... 32 3 LITERATURE REVIEW AND HISTORY OF RESEARCH ON ATKA . e . 37 Introduction ..................... 37 Netsvetov .............. ......... 37 Jochelson and HrdliEka ................ 38 Bank ....................... 39 Bergslind . 40 Veltre and'Vll;r;! .................................... 41 Taniisif. ....................... 41 Bilingual materials .................. 41 Conclusions ...................... 42 iii 4 OVERVIEW OF ALEUT RESOURCE UTILIZATION . 43 Introduction ............
  • Identifying Nesting Habitat of Kittlitz's

    Identifying Nesting Habitat of Kittlitz's

    Kenney & Kaler: NestingShort habitat Notes of Kittlitz’s Murrelets 73 IDENTIFYING NESTING HABITAT OF KITTLITZ’S MURRELETS BRACHYRAMPHUS BREVIROSTRIS: OLD NESTS LEAD TO A NEW BREEDING RECORD LEAH A. KENNEY1 & ROBB S.A. KALER2 1Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge, Homer, AK, USA ([email protected]) 2Migratory Bird Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, AK, USA Received 2 September 2012, accepted 27 December 2012 Kittlitz’s Murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris) is one of the rarest Kittlitz’s Murrelets at Agattu Island (hereafter, Agattu). In 2009, the breeding seabirds in the North Pacific and one of the least known second year of the Agattu murrelet study, we revisited all previously in North America. With a patchy distribution in both Alaska and discovered nests and noted that several nest sites had increased the Russian Far East, the Kittlitz’s Murrelet population in Alaska plant cover compared with the surrounding area. Specifically, nest is estimated at 19 578 individuals (range 8 190–36 193; BirdLife scrapes where a murrelet chick survived for at least 10–15 days International 2012). Owing to its small population size, restricted contained dense mosses (Tetraplodon mnioides; a coprophilous moss distribution, and an apparent rapid population decline, the US Fish usually found growing on fecal materials and animal remains) and and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has proposed Kittlitz’s Murrelet as grasses (Poaceae). Kittlitz’s Murrelet adults provision their young a candidate species for listing under the Endangered Species Act with marine fishes at the nest scrape during the 24–40 day nestling (USFWS 2009). period (Day et al. 1999, Kaler et al.
  • A Preliminary Baseline Study of Subsistence Resource Utilization in the Pribilof Islands

    A Preliminary Baseline Study of Subsistence Resource Utilization in the Pribilof Islands

    A PRELIMINARY BASELINE STUDY OF SUBSISTENCE RESOURCE UTILIZATION IN THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS Douglas W. Veltre Ph.D Mary J. Veltre, B.A. Technical Paper Number 57 Prepared for Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Contract 81-119 October 15, 1981 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . The authors would like to thank those numerous mem- bers of St. George and St. Paul who gave generously of their time and knowledge to help with this project. The Tanaq Corporation of St. George and the Tanadgusix Corporation of St. Paul, as well as the village councils of both communities, also deserve thanks for their cooperation. In addition, per- sonnel of the National Marine Fisheries Service in the Pribi- lofs provided insight into the fur seal operations. Finally, Linda Ellanna and Alice Stickney of the Department of Fish and Game gave valuable assistance and guidance, especially through their participation in field research. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . ii Chapter I INTRODUCTION . 1 Purpose . 1 Research objectives . : . 4 Research methods . 6 Discussion of research methodology . 8 Organization of the report . 11 II BACKGROUND ON ALEUT SUBSISTENCE . 13 Introduction . 13 Precontact subsistence patterns . 15 The early postcontact period . 22 Conclusions . 23 III HISTORICAL BACXGROUND . 27 Introduction . 27 Russian period . 27 American period ........... 35 History of Pribilof Island settlements ... 37 St. George community profile ........ 39 St. Paul community profile ......... 45 Conclusions ......... ; ........ 48 IV THE NATURAL SETTING .............. 50 Introduction ................ 50 Location, geography, and geology ...... 50 Climate ................... 55 Fauna and flora ............... 61 Aleutian-Pribilof Islands comparison .... 72 V SUBSISTENCE RESOURCES AND UTILIZATION IN THE PRIBILOF ISLANDS ............ 74 Introduction ................ 74 Inventory of subsistence resources .
  • Adak Army Base and Adak Naval Operating Base and Or Common Adak Naval Station (Naval Air Station Adak) 2

    Adak Army Base and Adak Naval Operating Base and Or Common Adak Naval Station (Naval Air Station Adak) 2

    N?S Ferm 10-900 OMB Mo. 1024-0018 (342) NHL - WWM, PACIFIC Eip. 10-31-84 Uncled States Department off the Interior National Park Service For NPS UM only National Register off Historic Places received Inventory Nomination Form date entered See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries complete applicable sections ' _______ 1. Name__________________ historic Adak Army Base and Adak Naval Operating Base and or common Adak Naval Station (Naval Air Station Adak) 2. Location street & number not (or publication city, town vicinity of state Alaska code 02 county Aleutian Islands code 010 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use __ district X public __ occupied __ agriculture __ museum building(s) private __ unoccupied commercial park structure both work in progress educational private residence X site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object in process X yes: restricted government __ scientific being considered .. yes: unrestricted industrial transportation __ no ,_X military __ other: 4. Owner off Property name United States Navy street & number Adak Naval Station, U.S. Department of the Navy city, town FPO Seattle vicinity of state Washington 98791 5. Location off Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. United States Navy street & number Adak Naval Station. U.S. Department of the Navy city, town FPO Seattle state Washington 98791 6. Representation in Existing Surveys y title None has this property been determined eligible? yes J^L no date federal _ _ state __ county local depository for survey records city, town state 7. Description Condition Check one Check one __ excellent __ deteriorated __ unaltered _K original site __ good X_ ruins _X altered __ moved date _.__._.
  • Aleutian Islands

    Aleutian Islands

    Journal of Global Change Data & Discovery. 2018, 2(1): 109-114 © 2018 GCdataPR DOI:10.3974/geodp.2018.01.18 Global Change Research Data Publishing & Repository www.geodoi.ac.cn Global Change Data Encyclopedia Aleutian Islands Liu, C.1* Yang, A. Q.2 Hu, W. Y.1 Liu, R. G.1 Shi, R. X.1 1. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China; 2. Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth，Chinese Academy of Sciences，Beijing100101，China Keywords: Aleutian Islands; Fox Islands; Four Mountains Islands; Andreanof Islands; Rat Islands; Near Islands; Kommandor Islands; Unimak Island; USA; Russia; data encyclopedia The Aleutian Islands extends latitude from 51°12′35″N to 55°22′14″N and longitude about 32 degrees from 165°45′10″E to 162°21′10″W, it is a chain volcanic islands belonging to both the United States and Russia[1–3] (Figure 1, 2). The islands are formed in the northern part of the Pacific Ring of Fire. They form part of the Aleutian Arc in the Northern Pacific Ocean, extending about 1,900 km westward from the Alaska Peninsula to- ward the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia, Figure 1 Dataset of Aleutian Islands in .kmz format and mark a dividing line between the Ber- ing Sea to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. The islands comprise 6 groups of islands (east to west): the Fox Islands[4–5], islands of Four Mountains[6–7], Andreanof Islands[8–9], Rat Islands[10–11], Near Is- lands[12–13] and Kommandor Islands[14–15].
  • I :-:L Library & Information Services

    I :-:L Library & Information Services

    !II•I ALEUTIAN CANADA GOOSE TRANSPLANT FROM BULDIR ISLAND TO AGATTU ISLAND, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA I SUHMER 1984 I by I FREDRIC G. DEINES I Key Words: Aleutian Canada Geese I Aleutian ~slands Rat Island Group Buldir Island Near Island Group I Agattu Island Transplanted gees~ .. Endangered Species I Distribution I I Restrictions: Internal Document - Not for Publication I U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ALEUTIAN ISLANDS UNIT I ALASKA MARITIME NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE BOX 5251 NAS ADAK FPO SEATTLE, WA 98791-0009 I (ADAK, ALASKA) ARLIS Alaska Resources I :-:l Library & Information Services ,......c.o Anchorage, Alaska I ,......c.o SEPTEMBER 1, 1984 ~ 0 0 0 I LO LO,...... M I M AcgDisk l/Bul-Ag84 I I Executive Summary 1 I List of Expendit~~n Members 2 Acknowledg~ments 2 I Introduction 2 Methods and Materials 4 Capturing the Geese 4. .I Handling the Geese 5 I Results and Discussion 8 Recommendations 16 I Literature Cited 17 Appendix: Appendix A. 1984 Banding Schedules for Wild 18 I Aleutian Canada Geese Released on Agattu Island I. Appendix B. 1984 Incidental Weather, Bird, Mamal 23 and Plant Observations at Buldir I FIGURES: Figure 1: Map of Central and Western 5 I Aleutian Islands Figure 2: Backpack and Goose Cage Illustration 6 I Figure 3: 1984 Goose Release Site, Agattu Island 9 Figure 4: 1984 Goose Capture Sites, Buldir Island 12 I TABLES: Table 1: Goose Tubing Solution 6 I Table 2.: Results of Capture, Banding and Trans- 11 planting of Aleutian Canada Geese from I Buldir Island to Agattu Island, 1984 Table 3: Estimated Age of Goslings Capture 13 & 14 I After First Day and Color Banded Table 4: Geese Exhibiting Some Paralysis 15 at Time of Release ARLIS I Alaska Res:ources Library & Information Service~.