DOCSLIB.ORG

Meeting Materials]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Meeting Materials] Federal Subsistence Board Work Session Materials January 24-25, 2018 Anchorage, Alaska FEDERAL SUBSISTENCE BOARD WORK SESSION USFWS Regional Office Gordon Watson Conference Room 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Wednesday, January 24, 2018 – 10:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Thursday, January 25, 2018 – 8:30 a.m. to Finish WORK SESSION AGENDA * Asterisk Indicates Action Item 1. Review and Adopt Agenda* 2. Information Exchange 3. Recommendations on 2018 Fisheries Resource Monitoring Program (Jennifer Hardin and Karen Hyer)*[Section 1 in meeting materials] a. Northern Region b. Yukon Region c. Kuskokwim Region d. Southwest Region e. Southcentral Region f. Southeast Region g. Multi Regional 4. Federal Subsistence Board Delegation of Authority to Federal Officials [Section 2 in meeting materials] a. Discussion Item: Delegating Board authority to restrict the taking of fish and wildlife on public lands for nonsubsistence uses or close public lands to the take of fish and wildlife for nonsubsistence uses (Jennifer Hardin) b. Federal Subsistence Fisheries Draft Revised Delegation of Authority Letters i. Kuskokwim Area – Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Subsistence Regional Advisory Council , Western Interior Alaska Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, Kuskokwim River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission and Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge Inseason Manager comments and suggestions (Gary Decossas)* ii. Cook Inlet Area – Ninilchik Traditional Council and Southcentral Subsistence Regional Advisory Council comments and suggestions (Scott Ayers)* 1 5. Regulatory Issues [Section 3 in meeting materials] a. Cook Inlet Area Federal Subsistence Fisheries Regulation Revision Proposed Rule (Theo Matuskowitz and Scott Ayers)* 6. Policy Issues [Section 4 in meeting materials] a. Potential Revisions to the Federal Subsistence Board Policy On Closures To Hunting, Trapping And Fishing On Federal Public Lands In Alaska (Chris McKee)* 7. 2017 Regional Advisory Council Appointment Vetting & Charter Revisions Update (Carl Johnson) [Section 5 in meeting materials] 8. Tribal Engagement Presentation (Orville Lind) 9. Future meeting dates* a. April 10-13, 2018: Federal Subsistence Wildlife Regulatory Public Meeting b. TBD: July 2018 Federal Subsistence Board Work Session c. TBD: January 2019 Federal Subsistence Fish and Shellfish Regulatory Meeting 10. Other Business 11. Adjourn Work Session Audio Access Information: Toll-Free: 1-888-455-5897 Pass Code: 3344290 2 Section 1: FRMP Section 1: Fisheries Resource Monitoring Program (FRMP) This page intentionally left blank. Drat 2018 Fiseries esource Monitorin lan DRAFT 2018 FISHERIES RESOURCE MONITORING PLAN OVERVIEW The mission of the Fisheries Resource Monitoring Program (Monitoring Program) is to identify and provide information needed to sustain subsistence fisheries on Federal public lands for rural Alaskans through a multidisciplinary and collaborative program. It is the responsibility of the Technical Review Committee (TRC) to develop the strongest possible Monitoring Plan for each region and across the entire state. The Monitoring Program Technical Review Committee evaluated and ranked 53 project proposals for Strategic Priority, Technical and Scientific Merit, Investigator Ability and Resources, Partnership and Capacity Building, and Cost/Benefit. Of these proposals, 29 were for continuing projects currently funded through the Monitoring Program. The final score determined the ranking of each proposal within the region (Tables 1–7). High ranking projects comprise a strong Monitoring Plan for the region by addressing strategically important information needs based on sound science and promoting cooperative partnerships and capacity building. The highest ranking projects listed are currently being considered for funding in the 2018 Fisheries Resource Monitoring Program. Background Beginning in 1999, the Federal Subsistence Management Program assumed expanded management responsibility for subsistence fisheries on Federal public lands in Alaska under the authority of Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). Expanded subsistence fisheries management introduced substantial new informational needs for the Federal system. Section 812 of ANILCA directs the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture, cooperating with the State of Alaska and other Federal agencies, to undertake research on fish and wildlife and subsistence uses on Federal public lands. To increase the quantity and quality of information available for management of subsistence fisheries, the Fisheries Resource Monitoring Program was established within the Office of Subsistence Management (OSM). The Monitoring Program was envisioned as a collaborative interagency, interdisciplinary approach to enhance existing fisheries research, and effectively communicate information needed for subsistence fisheries management on Federal public lands. Biennially, the Office of Subsistence Management announces a funding opportunity for investigation plans addressing subsistence fisheries on Federal public lands. The 2018 Notice of Funding Opportunity focused on priority information needs developed by the Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils with input from strategic plans and subject matter specialists. The Monitoring Program is administered through regions, which were developed to match subsistence management regulations, as well as stock, harvest, and community issues common to a geographic area. The six Monitoring Program regions are shown in Figure 1. January 2018 Federal Subsistence Board Work Session Section 1, p. 1 Drat 2018 Fiseries esource Monitorin lan Figure 1. Geographic Regions for the Fisheries Resource Monitoring Program. Strategic plans sponsored by the Monitoring Program have been developed by workgroups of fisheries managers, researchers, Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils, and by other stakeholders for three of the six regions: Southeast, Southcentral (excluding Cook Inlet Area), and Southwest Alaska. These plans identify prioritized information needs for each major subsistence fishery and are available for viewing on the Federal Subsistence Management Program website (http://www.doi.gov/subsistence/index.cfm. For the Northern Region and the Cook Inlet Area, assessments of priority information needs were developed from experts on the Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils, the Technical Review Committee, Federal and State managers, and staff from the Office of Subsistence Management. To implement the Monitoring Program, a collaborative approach is utilized in which five Federal agencies (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and U.S. Forest Service) work with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils, Alaska Native and rural organizations, and other organizations. Projects are selected for funding through an evaluation and review process that is designed to advance projects that are strategically important for the Federal Subsistence Management Program, technically sound, administratively competent, promote partnerships and capacity building, and are cost effective. Projects are evaluated by a panel called the Technical Review Committee. The Technical Review Committee provides scientific evaluation of investigation plans submitted for funding consideration. This committee is a standing interagency committee of senior technical experts that is foundational to the credibility and scientific integrity of the evaluation process for projects funded by the Monitoring Section 1, p. 2 January 2018 Federal Subsistence Board Work Session Drat 2018 Fiseries esource Monitorin lan Program. The Technical Review Committee reviews, evaluates, and makes recommendations about proposed projects, consistent with the mission of the Monitoring Program. Fisheries and Anthropology staff from OSM provide support for the Technical Review Committee. Recommendations from the Technical Review Committee provide the basis for further comments from Councils, the public, the Interagency Staff Committee, and the Federal Subsistence Board, with final approval of the Monitoring Plan by the Assistant Regional Director of OSM. Three broad categories of information are solicited for the Monitoring Program: 1) harvest monitoring, 2) traditional ecological knowledge, and 3) stock status and trends. Harvest monitoring studies provide information on numbers and species of fish harvested, locations of harvests, and gear types used. Methods used to gather information on subsistence harvest patterns may include harvest calendars, mail-in questionnaires, household interviews, subsistence permit reports and telephone interviews. Traditional ecological knowledge studies are studies of local knowledge directed at collecting and analyzing information on a variety of topics, including: the sociocultural aspects of subsistence, fish ecology, species identification, local names, life history, taxonomy, seasonal movements, harvests, spawning and rearing areas, population trends, environmental observations, and traditional management systems. Some methods used to document traditional ecological knowledge include ethnographic fieldwork, key informant interviews with local experts, place name mapping, and open-ended surveys. Stock status and trends studies provide information on abundance and run timing; age, size and sex composition; migration and geographic distribution; survival of juveniles or adults; stock production; genetic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Technical Paper No. 421 Harvest and Use of Wild Resources In
    Technical Paper No. 421 Harvest and Use of Wild Resources in Northway, Alaska, 2014, with special attention to nonsalmon fish by Anna R. Godduhn and Marylynne L. Kostick November 2016 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Symbols and Abbreviations The following symbols and abbreviations, and others approved for the Système International d'Unités (SI), are used without definition in the reports by the Division of Subsistence. All others, including deviations from definitions listed below, are noted in the text at first mention, as well as in the titles or footnotes of tables, and in figure or figure captions. Weights and measures (metric) General Mathematics, statistics centimeter cm Alaska Administrative Code AAC all standard mathematical signs, symbols deciliter dL all commonly-accepted and abbreviations gram g abbreviations e.g., alternate hypothesis HA hectare ha Mr., Mrs., base of natural logarithm e kilogram kg AM, PM, etc. catch per unit effort CPUE kilometer km all commonly-accepted coefficient of variation CV liter L professional titles e.g., Dr., Ph.D., common test statistics (F, t, χ2, etc.) meter m R.N., etc. confidence interval CI milliliter mL at @ correlation coefficient (multiple) R millimeter mm compass directions: correlation coefficient (simple) r east E covariance cov Weights and measures (English) north N degree (angular ) ° cubic feet per second ft3/s south S degrees of freedom df foot ft west W expected value E gallon gal copyright greater than > inch in corporate suffixes: greater than or equal to ≥ mile mi Company Co. harvest per unit effort HPUE nautical mile nmi Corporation Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • Mount Wrangell District, Alaska
    A, Economic Qeol y, 25 Rofeasional Paper No. 15 Series{ B, Dwmiptins Q&, 80 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNlTED S'l'hTES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES U. \flALCOTT, I)IRECTOR THE MINERAL RESOURCES OF THE MOUNT WRANGELL DISTRICT, ALASKA BY WALTER C, MENDENHALL AND FRANK C, SCHRADER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1903 .I MOUNT WRANGELL. VIFW t-keri frnm thi, Giivr,~nment im1 above To~is~iaBr~iloe 41 mles from tire sumtnit of tits maunin,~ I; NkDlNA RIVER BARS, Mnunt Drum in backgniuncl. Page . Introduction ................................................................................ 9 Copper ................................................................................... 13 Southern area ......................................................................... 13 Location ................................................................ ., ....... 13 Routes and trails ................................................................. 13 Geologic sketch .................................................................. 14 Nikolai greenstone ............................................................. 14 Chitistone limestone .......................................................... 14 Triassic shales and limestones ............................ .. .......... 15 Kennicott formation .......................................................... 15 Intrusive rocks ............................................................... 15 Copper occurrences ............................................................... 16 General statement ...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Nutzotin Mountains, Alaska Gold Deposits Near Nabesna
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Harold L. Ickes, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. C. Mendcnhall, Director Bulletin 933-B GEOLOGY OF THE NUTZOTIN MOUNTAINS, ALASKA BY FRED H. MOFFIT With a section on the IGNEOUS ROCKS By RUSSELL G. WAYLAND GOLD DEPOSITS NEAR NABESNA BY RUSSELL G. WAYLAND Mineral resources of Alaska, 1940 Pages 103-199 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1943 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. ....... Price 65 cents CONTENTS Page Geology of the Nutzotin Mountains, Alaska, by F. H. Moffit.--_--_---_ 103 Abstract_____________--___-_---_____---__---____-____- _ 103 Introduction. __________________________________ _____________ 104 Location of the area-_-_-__------_-_~-___--____-_______-__ 104 Previous work___________________________________________ 105 Present investigation______------_--_--_.___--__-_____---_ 106 Geography _-_-_______--__-___-_-____--______--_______---__ 107 Relief and drainage_____ ___ _. 107 Routes and trails____--_____-----_--___.__.________________ 108 Timber and forage_______'_______--_______--___________-__ 110 Geology....._--_.___._.._--_---_--.___________ 113 Synopsis of geologic formations __________________________ 113 Paleozoic or pre-Paleozoic rocks____________________________ 115 Paleozoic rocks..__________________________________________ 116 Devonian and Permian rocks_-_-_-___-__--_.____-__-._ 116 Character and distribution ______________________ 116 Age and correlation..---...._______________________ 120 Mesozoic rocks......______________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Along the Altsetnaey Nalcine Trail
    Along the Ałts’e’tnaey- Nal’cine Trail Historical Narratives, Historical Places by William E. Simeone Foreword by Evelyn Beeter and Barbara Cellarius Along the Ałts’e’ tnaey-Nal’cine Trail: Historical Narratives, Historical Places Produced by Mount Sanford Tribal Consortium, 2014 This project is supported in part through a cooperative agreement with Wrangell- St. Elias National Park and Preserve. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government. Front cover: Nabesna Road and the Nutzotin Mountains. Photo by Wilson Justin. Cover and text design by Paula Elmes, ImageCraft Publications & Design Contents Foreword. 2 Introduction . 4 Background . 6 Upper Copper River Places . 16 Tanada Creek Drainage . 20 Jack Creek Drainage . 36 Platinum Creek Drainage . 42 Nabesna River . 49 Pickerel Lake . 58 Chisana River . 60 White River . 68 Conclusion . 70 Epilogue . 72 Acknowledgements . 75 Appendix A: Boundaries of Upper Ahtna Territory . 76 Appendix B: U.S. Census 1920 and 1930 for Batzulnetas, Chistochina, and Cooper Creek (Upper Nabesna) . 78 References Cited . 82 1 Foreword ENCOMPASSING MORE THAN 13 MILLION ACRES OF LAND and some of the highest peaks on North America, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve is the largest con- servation unit managed by the National Park Service. Given the park’s size and its location in Alaska, many visitors view it as an uninhabited wilderness. Yet to Athabascan and Tlingit people, much of the park is home—a cultural landscape within which they have hunted, trapped, fished, gathered, and lived for generations, a landscape crisscrossed with networks of trails and travel routes.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Slana-Tok District, Alaska
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Harold L. Ickes, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. C. Mendenhall, Director Bulletin 904 GEOLOGY OF THE SLANA-TOK DISTRICT, ALASKA BY FRED H. MOFFIT UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1938 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. ------ Price 35 cents CONTENTS Page Abstract- _______--_-_________________----________.___------------- 1 Introduction. _______________ _«_________-_______.i_____-_________-_-_ 2 Area covered-_-_________-_____---_-________-__--__-----------_ 2" Previous work. _______________________________________________ 3> Present investigation.___________________________________________ 4 Geography _ ___________________________..__-____-________---_------_ 51 Relief and drainage._____-________--_____---____-_-_-_-----_--_ 5 Routes and trails._.-_____-___-_----____--_-___------__--__-_-. 7 Timber and vegetation.._________-__.-_____-_________--_------__ 9 Geology. _________-_______-_-______'---__-___-_-______---__--_---__ 10> Outline.___ ______--___-_---_-______-_______-_--__-.-._-_ 10 Undifferentiated pre-Devonian schist.....____.__.___.____._____.. 13 Middle Devonian rocks____._________________....___.....___._ 16 Permian rocks.________________________________________________ 19 Undifferentiated Middle Devonian and Permian rocks___-____._____ 27 Mesozoic rocks._______________________________________________ 30 Igneous rocks.________________________________________________ 33 Intrusive rocks.___________________________________________ 34 Undifferentiated
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Tanana Place Names and Navigation in the Scottie Creek Valley
    Getting to Know the Neighbourhood: Upper Tanana Place Names and Navigation in the Scottie Creek Valley of the Yukon - Alaska Borderlands Norman Alexander Easton Lecturer in Anthropology and Northern Studies Yukon College Whitehorse, Yukon Territory Canada Y1A 1K5 email: [email protected] Getting to Know the Neighbourhood: Upper Tanana Place Names and Navigation in the Scottie Creek Valley of the Yukon - Alaska Borderlands. ABSTRACT. Among other functions, place names provide a means of geographical reference to locate position on the landscape. However, as Kari has noted, there is considerable replication of place names within the Upper Tanana language territory. There are numerous "mineral lick" creeks and "grass" lakes, for example. This repetition may be related to reducing the total number of place names within the semantic domain of geography, but presents the problem of distinguishing one "mineral lick" lake from another in speech. Based on my collaborative research with Mr. Joseph Tommy Johnny of the Scottie Creek valley, I will present one Upper Tanana speaker's solution to this problem, a solution which is more generally shared throughout the language region. Mr. Johnny applies several higher orders of geographic organization to the landscape, associating individual place names within distinctive "neighbourhoods" or "blocks," which provide a secondary geographic reference to commonly repeated place names. This paper will provide examples of place name repetition, document the "neighbourhoods" of Scottie Creek which Mr. Johnny has identified, as well as discuss place name research more generally in the borderlands region. Keywords: Upper Tanana, Athapaskan, Linguistics, Place Names, Navigation, Scottie Creek, Yukon - Alaska Borderlands - 2 - INTRODUCTION The Scottie Creek valley lies astride the Yukon - Alaska border.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeology of the Uppermost Tanana Basin: Results of a Survey of the Nabesna and Chisana Rivers, East-Central Alaska Joshua J
    ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE UPPERMOST TANANA BASIN: RESULTS OF A SURVEY OF THE NABESNA AND CHISANA RIVERS, EAST-CENTRAL ALASKA Joshua J. Lynch Department of Anthropology, Texas A&M University, 4352-TAMU, College Station, TX 77843; and Center for the Environmental Management of Military Lands, Colorado State University and U.S. Army, Directorate of Public Works, ATTN: IMFW-PWE (Lynch), 1060 Gaffney Road, #4500, Ft. Wainwright, AK 99703; [email protected] Ted Goebel Center for the Study of the First Americans, Department of Anthropology, Texas A&M University, 4352-TAMU, College Station, TX 77843; [email protected] Kelly E. Graf Center for the Study of the First Americans, Department of Anthropology, Texas A&M University, 4352-TAMU, College Station, TX 77843; [email protected] Jeffrey T. Rasic National Park Service, Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, Fairbanks, AK 99709; [email protected] Stephen C. Kuehn Department of Physical Science, Concord University, Athens, WV 24712; [email protected] ABSTRACT The middle Tanana River basin has proven to be an important area for investigating the late Pleisto- cene and Holocene occupations of interior Alaska; however, less research has been reported for the uppermost part of the valley. In 2011, we conducted a reconnaissance cultural-resource survey of land- forms along two upper Tanana River tributaries, the Nabesna and Chisana rivers, and nearby uplands surrounding Jatahmund Lake to evaluate the archaeological potential of these areas. Here we report the discovery of eight archaeological sites potentially spanning the last ~7000 years of prehistory. We consider these sites in the context of Holocene human occupation of interior Alaska, especially (1) cul- tural chronology and (2) the effects of tephra falls on human populations during the middle and late Holocene.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Tanana Ethnographic Overview and Assessment, Wrangell St. Elias National Park and Preserve
    Technical Paper No. 325 Upper Tanana Ethnographic Overview and Assessment, Wrangell St. Elias National Park and Preserve by Terry L. Haynes and William E. Simeone July 2007 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Symbols and Abbreviations The following symbols and abbreviations, and others approved for the Système International d'Unités (SI), are used without definition in the following reports by the Divisions of Sport Fish and of Commercial Fisheries: Fishery Manuscripts, Fishery Data Series Reports, Fishery Management Reports, and Special Publications. All others, including deviations from definitions listed below, are noted in the text at first mention, as well as in the titles or footnotes of tables, and in figure or figure captions. Weights and measures (metric) General Measures (fisheries) centimeter cm Alaska Administrative fork length FL deciliter dL Code AAC mideye-to-fork MEF gram g all commonly accepted mideye-to-tail-fork METF hectare ha abbreviations e.g., Mr., Mrs., standard length SL kilogram kg AM, PM, etc. total length TL kilometer km all commonly accepted liter L professional titles e.g., Dr., Ph.D., Mathematics, statistics meter m R.N., etc. all standard mathematical milliliter mL at @ signs, symbols and millimeter mm compass directions: abbreviations east E alternate hypothesis HA Weights and measures (English) north N base of natural logarithm e cubic feet per second ft3/s south S catch per unit effort CPUE foot ft west W coefficient of variation CV gallon gal copyright © common test statistics (F, t, χ2, etc.) inch in corporate suffixes: confidence interval CI mile mi Company Co. correlation coefficient nautical mile nmi Corporation Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve Natural Resource Condition Assessment
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve Natural Resource Condition Assessment Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/WRD/NRR—2011/406 ON THE COVER. Nabesna River and Glacier Photograph by: Barry Drazkowski, August 2009 Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve Natural Resource Condition Assessment Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/WRD/NRR—2011/406 Barry Drazkowski Kevin Stark Michael Komp Greta Bernatz Chip Brown Courtney Lee Chad Richtman Andrew Robertson Kyle Slifka GeoSpatial Services Saint Mary‘s University of Minnesota 700 Terrace Heights, Box #7 Winona, Minnesota 55987 This report was prepared under Task Agreement J8W07080025 between the National Park Service and Saint Mary‘s University of Minnesota, through the Pacific Northwest Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit. June 2011 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Subsections of Wrangell-St. Elias National Park & Preserve
    ECOLOGICAL SUBSECTIONS OF WRANGELL-ST. ELIAS NATIONAL PARK & PRESERVE Mapping and Delineation by: David K. Swanson Photographs by: Blain Anderson, National Park Service Alaska Region Inventory and Monitoring Program 2525 Gambell Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Alaska Region Inventory & Monitoring Program 2525 Gambell Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 (907) 257-2488 Fax (907) 264-5428 Text and maps by David K. Swanson Photographs by Blain Anderson National Park Service Inventory & Monitoring Program ECOLOGICAL SUBSECTIONS OF WRANGELL-ST. ELIAS NATIONAL PARK & PRESERVE, ALASKA September, 2001 Contents Contents.......................................................................................................................... ii Introduction..................................................................................................................... 4 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 1 Ecological Unit Descriptions – Alaska Range Region............................................................. 2 JKV Jack Valley Subsection .......................................................................................... 3 MES Mentasta Sedimentary Mountains Subsection ......................................................... 4 NBB Nabesna Basin Subsection .................................................................................... 5 SMM Southern Mentasta Mountains Subsection ............................................................. 7 Ecological
    [Show full text]
  • UPPER NABESNA, CHISANA and SNAG RIVER 4REA the Area
    UPPER NABESNA, CHISANA AND SNAG RIVER 4REA The area considered in this report lies along the heqdwateys of the Nabesm, and Ch3sqna Rivers and includes a portion of the Nutzotin Mountains drafning into the two main forks of Snag River. It covers in general an area extending 32 miles northeqsternly from the Wrangel! Mountains and 48 miles southeasternly from the Nabesna River Valley. The Wrangell Mountains receive their name from Mount Wrangell which is centrally located in that imposing group of mountains lying between the St. Elias Range on the southeast, the Chugach Mountains on the south, and the Nutzotin Mountains on the north, These Nrangell Mountains are extremely rugged and the higher portions are ice covered. Mount Wangel1 and Mount Sanford are active volcanies, giving off smoke and occasionally ejecting some ash. This area was first mapped by Schrader and Witherspoon in 1902. (Mendenhall, Walter, C. , and Schrader, Frank C. , the Mineral Resources of the Mount Wrangell district, Alaska; Prof, Paper U. S. Geol . Survey No. 15, 1903). Moffi t, Knopf and Capps covered the Nabesnq, Chisana, and White Rivers in 1908 (Moffi t, F. H. , and Knopf , Adolph, with a section on the quaternary by Capps, S. R., Mineral resources of the Nabesna-White River District, Alaska: Bull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 417). In 1914 the Chisana and White Rivers and the Chisana Placer District were surveyed in more detail (Capps, Stephen, R., the Chisana-White River District, Alaska: Bull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 630). The material for this report was gathered in June and July 1930 from a detailed exam- ination of the several localities herein described, and from information furnished by various miners and other residents of the locality.
    [Show full text]
  • Nabesna Road Audio Tour Script
    Nabesna Road Audio Tour Script Sources: National Park Service resources including the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park & Preserve website (www.nps.gov/wrst), the Nabesna Road Guide, NPS brochures, park staff, the Central Alaska Network (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/cakn/WRST.cfm) and AK Dept. of Fish & Game Wildlife Notebooks (www.adfg.state.ak.us/pubs/notebook/notehome.php). The mission of Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve: To preserve and protect ecological integrity and heritage resources of a vast ecosystem in south-central Alaska, while providing for public use in a wilderness setting. This park was designated to encompass an area large enough to include a diverse range of scenery, high latitude biomes, and landscape processes where humans are considered an integral part of the ecosystem. Ecosystem integrity and carefully planned public use is essential so there is opportunity for the continuation of subsistence lifestyles, future scientific investigations, interpretation of natural forces, and the inspiration and solitude of wilderness experience for present and future generations. Track Names: 1. Slana Ranger Station to Slana River Bridge 2. Slana River Bridge to 4-Mile Road Junction 3. 4-Mile Road Junction to the Park/Preserve Sign at Mile 5.6 4. Park/Preserve Sign at Mile 5.6 to Copper Lake Trailhead 5. Copper Lake Trailhead to Dead Dog Hill 6. Dead Dog Hill to Caribou Creek Trailhead 7. Caribou Creek Trailhead to Rock Lake Rest Area 8. Rock Lake Rest Area to the Camping Area at Twin Lakes 9. The Camping Area at Twin Lakes to Lost Creek Trailhead 10.
    [Show full text]