YUKON FLATS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT
Calender Year 1996
U. S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM REVIEW AND APPROVALS
YUKON FLATS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Fairbanks, Alaska
ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 1996 c~ Refuge Manager Northern Ecoregion Refuge Coordinator Refuges and Wildlife
Regional Office Approval Date INTRODUCTION
The Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) was established by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) on December 2, 1980. The refuge is the third largest in the National Wildlife Refuge System. The exterior boundaries encompass over 11 million acres (about the size ofNew Hampshire and Massachusetts combined). The refuge extends 220 miles along its east/west axis and 120 miles from its southern to northern boundaries; it is roughly bisected by the Arctic Circle. An estimated 40,000 lakes, ponds, and sloughs dot the refuge, and segments of 10 major rivers traverse the refuge before discharging into the Yukon River.
The major purposes for which the Yukon Flats NWR was established and shall be managed are specified in ANILCA. These purposes include (but are not limited to):
(i) to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity including, but not limited to, canvasbacks and other migratory birds, Dall sheep, bears, moose, wolves, wolverines and other forbearers, caribou (including participation in coordinated ecological studies and management ofthe Porcupine and F ortymile caribou herds) and salmon;
(ii) to fulfill the international treaty obligations of the United States with respect to fish and wildlife and their habitats;
(iii) to provide, in a manner consistent with the purposes set forth in subparagraphs (i) and (ii), the opportunity for continued subsistence uses by local residents; and
(iv) to ensure, to the maximum extent practicable and in a manner consistent with the purposes set forth in paragraph (i), water quality and necessary water quantity within the refuge.
The refuge contains a variety of plant communities representative of all major habitat types occurring within Interior Alaska. In addition to the typical "Flats" habitats of marshes, wet meadows, muskeg, lakes, ponds, and other wetlands, the refuge has large areas of black and white spruce, paper birch, balsam poplar and aspen, all interspersed to provide a mosaic of vegetation communities. Alpine tundra is found in the White Mountains, along the southern border of the refuge and in the Hodzana Highlands in the northwest corner of the refuge.
All things considered, probably the most important feature of this refuge is its contribution of waterfowl to all major flyways ofNorth America. The Yukon Flats provides one of the greatest waterfowl breeding areas in North America and is perhaps the most consistent production area for waterfowl on the continent. Waterfowl displaced from their traditional breeding grounds on the prairie potholes during drought, migrate northward to the "Flats" where vast wetland areas are periodically recharged through flooding of the Yukon River and its tributaries. Waterfowl banded on the Yukon Flats have been recovered in Belize, Columbia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Russia, eight Canadian Provinces, and 45 of the 50 United States-- truly a shared resource, nationally and internationally. The refuge is open to both sport and subsistence hunting, subject to State and Federal regulations. Approximately 1200 residents of the eight villages in and adjacent to the refuge depend heavily on the area's large and small game. An undetermined, but relatively small number of non-local hunters access the refuge by aircraft or river boat to hunt moose, bear and to a lesser extent other game. Sport, commercial and subsistence fishing is allowed. Nearly all of the chinook, chum, and coho salmon caught are taken with nets or fish wheels by local residents, primarily for personal use or dog food. Fish harvests are regulated by Alaska laws and regulations.
The Yukon Flats ranks as one of the most important fur production regions in the Nation. Measured in terms of use days, or economic and cultural significance to local residents, trapping is one of the more important refuge activities. Trapping provides the basis for some of the most traditional lifestyles remaining in America -- a living cultural resource which the refuge is mandated by ANll...,CA to protect.
Virtually all wildlife observation, camping and picnicking not related to hunting, fishing, and trapping is associated with float trips down the refuge's boatable rivers. The most commonly floated rivers include Beaver Creek, Birch Creek, and the Chandalar, Porcupine, Sheenjek, and Yukon Rivers.
Lake complex on the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge (8/96 Sowl). TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Page A. IDGHLIGillS ...... 1
B. CLTh1ATIC CONDITIONS ...... 2
C. LAND ACQUISITION
1. Fee Title ...... (Nothing to Report) 2. Easements ...... (Nothing to Report) 3. Other ...... (Nothing to Report)
D. PLANNING
1. Master Plan ...... (Nothing to Report) 2. Management Plan ...... 5 3. Public Participation...... (Nothing to Report) 4. Compliance with Environmental and Cultural Resources Mandates ...... (Nothing to Report) 5. Research and Investigations ...... 6 6. Other ...... (Nothing to Report)
E. ADMINISTRATION
1. Personnel ...... 7 2. Youth Programs ...... 14 3. Other Manpower Programs ...... (Nothing to Report) 4. Volunteer Programs ...... 14 5. Funding ...... 16 6. Safety ...... 17 7. Technical Assistance ...... 20 8. Other ...... (Nothing to Report)
F. HABITAT MANAGEMENT
1. General ...... 21 2. Wetlands ...... 22 3. Forests ...... (Nothing to Report) 4. Croplands ...... (Nothing to Report) 5. Grasslands ...... (Nothing to Report) 6. Other Habitats ...... 22 Page 7. Grazing ...... (Nothing to Report) 8. Haying ...... (Nothing to Report) 9. Fire Management ...... 24 10. Pest Control ...... (Nothing to Report) 11. Water Rights ...... (Nothing to Report) 12. Wilderness and Special Areas ...... (Nothing to Report) 13. WPA Easement Monitoring ...... (Nothing to Report)
G. WILDLIFE
1. Wildlife Diversity ...... 39 2. Endangered and/or Threatened Species ...... 42 3. Waterfowl ...... 43 4. Marsh and Water Birds ...... 47 5. Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns and Allied Species ...... 47 6. Raptors ...... 48 7. Other Migr:atory Birds ...... 48 8. Game Mammals ...... 65 9. Marine Mammals ...... (Nothing to Report) 10. Other Resident Wildlife ...... 74 11. Fisheries Resources ...... (Nothing to Report) 12. Wildlife\Propagation and Stocking ...... 76 13. Surplus Animal Disposal ...... (Nothing to Report) 14. Scientific Collections ...... 77 15. Animal Control ...... (Nothing to Report) 16. Marking and Banding...... 78 17. Disease Prevention and Control ...... (Nothing to Report)
H. PUBLIC USE
1. General ...... 85 2. Outdoor Classrooms - Students ...... 86 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 ...... 87 7. Other Interpretive Programs ...... 88 8. Hunting ...... 91 9. Fishing ...... 95 10. Trapping ...... 102 11. Wildlife Observations ...... (Nothing to Report) 12. Other Wildlife Oriented Recreation ...... 103 13. Camping ...... 104 Page 14. Picnicking ...... (Nothing to Report) 15. Off-Road Vehicles ...... (Nothing to Report) 16. Other Non-Wildlife Oriented Recreation ...... (Nothing to Report) 17. Law Enforcement ...... 104 18. Cooperating Associations ...... 105 19. Concessions ...... 105
I. EQUIP:rvt:ENT Al'ID FACILITIES
1. New Construction ...... 105 2. Rehabilitation ...... (Nothing to Report) 3. Major Maintenance ...... (Nothing to Report) 4. Equipment Utilization and Replacement ...... 109 5. Communications Systems ...... 110 6. Computer Systems ...... 112 7. Energy Conservation ...... (Nothing to Report) 8. Other ...... (Nothing to Report)
J. OTHER ITEMS
1. Cooperative Programs ...... (Nothing to Report) 2. Other Economic Uses ...... (Nothing to Report) 3. Items of Interest ...... (Nothing to Report) 4. Credits ...... 112
K. FEEDBACK...... 113
L. LITERATURE CITED ...... 115
N. INFORMATION PACKET (inside back cover) 1
A HIGHLIGHTS
* We had a very productive field season this year! - Our black bear monitoring efforts continued; four additional bears were collared and all22 radio-collared bears were monitored weekly (Section G.8). -An off-road breeding bird survey was conducted on the Porcupine River for the fourth consecutive year (Section G. 7). - Nine off-road breeding bird point counts were successfully completed at Marten Island and Plot G (Section G. 7). -During the second year of operating a M.A.P.S. station at Canvasback Lake, we banded 443 birds of27 different species (Section G.7). - Two waterfowl production surveys were conducted at Canvasback Lake during July (Section G.3). - Excellent survey conditions resulted in an all time high Dall sheep count for the Schwatka!Victoria Mountain area-- 176 sheep (Section G.8). -Three fire fuel loading/consumption plots were established in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service and Alaska Fire Service (Section F.9). -In August we banded 605 ducks: 237 northern pintails, 320 green-winged teal, 31 mallards, and 17 American wigeon (Section G.l6). - FMO Grissom investigated the ignition sources of nine different fires throughout the State (Section F.9). -Arctic NWR Botanists, GIS Specialist, and refuge FMO classified 140 plots and photographed six flight lines to help ground-truth the refuge GIS vegetation/fuels map (Section F.9). -With assistance from the Alaska Department ofFish and Game, the National Park Service and the Village ofBeaver, a moose survey on 1,500 mi2 ofthe western Yukon Flats was completed in early November (Section G.8). - Botanists on the Arctic NWR staff found two plant species new to science and 1YlQ. species new to North America on south facing bluffs of the Porcupine River in the northeastern part of the Yukon Flats Refuge (Section F.6).
* On February 12, the staff welcomed aboard Jim Akaran, our first local-hire permanent Fish and Wildlife Biologist (FWB).
* Paul Williams, Sr. of Beaver became the refuge's first permanent local-hire Refuge Information Technician (RIT) on September 1.
*The refuge continued mailing periodic "Information Bulletins" to all595 P.O. Box holders within the Yukon Flats.
* Refuge staff members helped plan and conduct in a very successful International Migratory Bird Day at the Noel Wein public library on May 11. 2
* A letter and fact sheet about the proposed wood bison reintroduction was sent out to all residents of the Yukon Flats on June 21.
* On July 4, Mike Vivion was forced to make an emergency crash landing of the refuge assigned aircraft in the White Mountains after a "catastrophic loss ofpower"(the crankshaft in N185CA broke).
*Refuge staff members helped plan and conduct a great National Wildlife Refuge Week celebration in Fairbanks-- approximately 16,000 Fairbanks residents were contacted.
* After ten months of planning and coordination with Anchorage GSA representatives, building managers, subcontractors, furniture vendors, and Regional Office staff, all three Fairbanks refuges moved into new office space in November.
*There was a moderately active fire season this summer-- 156,000 acres burned.
*On November 12, Greg McClellan became the new Refuge Operations Specialist/Subsistence Coordinator for the Yukon Flats, Kanuti, and Arctic Refuges.
* On August 21, RM Heuer had the pleasure of giving Acting Director John Rogers and Regional Director David Allen an aerial tour of the refuge.
* Refuge staff members went the extra mile in public outreach-- with more than 30 classroom presentations, and participation in many local outreach efforts.
- Eleven volunteers contributed 191.5 hours oftime to refuge programs.
B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS
Straddling the Arctic Circle, the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge enjoys a subarctic continental climate, characterized by extreme seasonal variation in temperature and daylight. Summers are generally warm, with temperatures exceeding 90 degrees Fahrenheit CF ). Fort Yukon, which is centrally situated within the refuge, holds the state record temperature of 100° F. Daylight exceeds civil twilighe for approximately 84 days, from May 13 to August 4. This extended daylight, in combination with the continental location, provides for warm and sunny summers. Conversely, the same continental location combined with the prolonged darkness ofwinter results in bitter cold. Winter temperatures of -50° and -60° Fare common on the refuge.
1 Civil twilight is the time of day when the sun is below the horizon by 6 o or less. 3
The official weather recording station on the Yukon Flats is located in Fort Yukon, and the temperature data for 1996 are presented in Table 1. The official yearly low was -54 oF on January 11, and the official high was 80°F on June 17 and 18. Monthly maximum and minimum temperatures for Fort Yukon are displayed in Figure 1. The mean monthly temperatures were similar between 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996 (Figure 2). The year was almost 3 o cooler than normal, with a mean temperature of 17.6 oF.
Table 1. Temperature data recorded at Fort Yukon, Alaska, 1996.
MEAN MEAN MEAN TEMP I MONTH I MAX TEMP MAX TEMP MIN TEMP MIN TEMP (DEPART FROM NORJ."\fl JAN 15 -24.2 -34.5 -54 -29.4 (-9.7)
FEB 38 -3.9 -18.8 -44 -11.4 (+3.0)
MAR 39 19.4 -5.1 -33 7.2 (+6.2)
APR 50 30.2 9.4 -15 20.9 (-0.4)
MAY 76 57.3 34.7 21 46.0 (+2.3)
JUN 80 68.1 48.3 31 58.2 (-0.6)
JUL 78 69.5 52.3 44 61.4 (0.0)
AUG 68 57.7 39.5 21 49.4 (-5.6)
SEP 64 43.7 30.4 21 37.0 (-4.2)
OCT 30 12.2 -4.6 -39 4.4 (-16.1)
NOV 25 -5.1 -18.6 -36 -11.9 (-7.6)
DEC 16 -14.8 -26.6 -51 -20.4 (-0.5) YEARLY MEAl'l' 48.3 25.8 8.9 -11.2 17.6 (-2.8)
Temperature was measured in degrees Fahrenheit.
Summer precipitation was recorded at the Remote Automated Weather Stations that are located on or near the refuge. Rain was generally lighter in the western half of the refuge (Table 2). May and early June were quite dry at nearly all stations, but showers became more widespread as June progressed. The rest of the summer passed with frequent, often widespread showers, and all the stations received from 3.6 to over 6 inches of rain by the time summer ended.
Although lake ice broke up late on the Yukon Flats this year, the refuge received little spring and summer flooding in 1996. 4
Figure 1. Maximum and minimum temperatures for Fort Yukon, Alaska in 1996 Note: Temperatures are measured in degrees Fahrenheit.
80 T E 60 M p 40 E R 20 A T 0 u R -20 E -40 -60 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Month
* Mean Lo . e Mean Hi • Min ,. Max
Figure 2. Mean monthly temperatures for Fort Yukon, Alaska 1993-1996 Note: Temperatures are measured in degrees Fahrenheit. 80 T E M 60 p E 40 R A 20 T u 0 R E -20
-40 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Month
• 1993 * . 1994 0 1995 1996 5
Table 2. Summer precipitation received at Remote Automated Weather Stations on and near the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. ISTATION II MAY I JUNE I JULY I AUGUST I SEPT. II TOTAL I, 7-Mile 0.42 0.63 1.49 0.60 0.49 3.63
New Lake 0.09* 0.34 1.26 0.73 1.53 3.95
Beaver 0.06* 1.23 0.68 1.37 1.71 5.05
Hodzana 0.06* 1.00 1.17 1.14 0.85 4.22
Vunzik 0.02 0.89 1.24 1.15 1.20 4.5
ANWR - 1.49 1.58 1.03 0.22 4.32
Preacher Creek 0.06* 2.34 0.62 1.29 1.07 5.38
Graphite Lake - 0.89 1.38 1.36 0.79 4.42
Salmon Trout 0.31 0.83 0.69 2.59 0.36 4.78
Bear Mountain 1.00 1.66 0.73 1.47 1.21 6.07 I Average II 0.25 I 1.13 I 1.08 1 1.271 0.9411 4.671 Avera~e IFort Yukon II 0.3 I 0.69 I 0.941 1.22 1 o.83 II 3.981 Precipitation was measured in inches. * Station started late, some precipitation may have been missed. -- Missing data, no estimate.
D. PLANNING
2. Management Plan
The Division ofRealty forwarded a draft of the uYukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge Land Protection Plan" to the refuge staff for review during July. Verbal comments and feedback were provided by the refuge staff. A meeting to discuss the comments was tentatively scheduled for fall of 1996. Due to other Realty priorities and a shortage of personnel, the meeting was postponed until early 1997. The land protection plan will identify privately owned lands within refuge boundaries that contain important wildlife habitats the Service wants to see protected. The Service might want to buy some of these lands (from willing sellers only), buy a conservation easement, enter into a land bank agreement, accept a land donation, or propose a land trade. Upon completion of the Land Protection Land (spring 1997), meetings/open houses will be held in each ofthe villages on the Yukon Flats to discuss land protection priorities. 6
5. Research and Investigations
Black Bear Monitoring
A black bear monitoring project entitled "Habitat Use, Home Range, and Movements ofBlack Bears on the Yukon Flats NWR," initiated in 1995, was continued in 1996. Adult females were examined in the den for presence of young in March and second year capture operations were conducted May 28 to June 9. Four additional bears were collared in 1996 and, by the end of the monitoring period (October 11), 18 bears still had functioning collars. For further information on this project see Section G.7 (game mammals).
Moose Calf Mortality Study
We continue to seek funding for a study proposal entitled 11 Sources, Rates, and Timing of Moose Calf and Cow Mortality on the Yukon Flats NWR. 11 The project was proposed to address the low moose density in the western Yukon Flats. We view this study as a key step in development of a cooperative moose management plan between management agencies and landowners on the Yukon Flats. Unfortunately funding was not secured in FY96, and the project was again postponed. We will continue to pursue funding in FY97. The study objectives are:
1) Determine the sources, rates, and timing of mortality among neonatal moose calves and adult cows in the western Yukon Flats.
2) Document seasonal habitat use by moose with emphasis on response to burned habitats.
3) Implement a cooperative moose education program with village schools and local subsistence users via satellite collars.
4) Determine quantity and quality of available moose browse in the western Yukon Flats.
Water Inventory
Instream flow measurements continued on selected drainages in the refuge this year. The objective for this five-year inventory is to quantifY water discharge at each of 11 streams and nvers. 7
E. ADMINISTRATION
1. Personnel
Jim Akaran, Local-hire Fish and Wildlife Biologist, GS-5, PFT (EOD 2/12/96)
Mark Bertram, Lead Wildlife Biologist, GS-11, PFT
Fred Deines, Deputy Refuge Manager, GS-11, PFT
Barbara Gaston, Administrative Technician, GS-6, PFT
Perry Grissom, Wildlife Biologist/Fire Management Officer, GS-11, PFT
Ted Heuer, Refuge Manager, GS-13, PFT
David James, Refuge Operations Specialist/Subsistence Coordinator, GS-11, PFT (resigned 3/15/96)
Andrea Kress, Office Automation Clerk, GS-03, Temporary Appointment (5/20/96 to 7/31/96)
Greg McClellan, Refuge Operations Specialist/Subsistence Coordinator, GS-11, PFT (EOD November 12, 1996)
Carol Ozanne, Office Automation Clerk, GS-03, Temporary Appointment (4/15/96 to 5/10/96)
Laura Pomeroy, Biological Technician, GS-5, Temporary Appointment (5/12/96 to 10/25/96)
Fred Roberts, Local-hire Biological Technician, GS-05, Intermittent Appointment (resigned 9/1/96)
Isaac Solomon, RAPS Program Enrollee (7/1/96 to 8/23/96)
Kristine Sowl, Biological Technician, GS-6, Term Appointment
Mike Vivion, Wildlife Biologist/Pilot, GS-12, PFT
Paul Williams, Local-hire Refuge Information Technician, GS-6, Permanent Seasonal (EOD 9/1/96) 8
There were several changes in permanent staff this year. In February, the refuge was lucky to welcome aboard Jim Akaran as our first permanent Local-hire Fish and Wildlife Biologist. Jim has more than 10 years of work experience with the Fish and Wildlife Service. He was most recently employed as a term Biological Technician with the Arctic NWR. He has also worked for the Fairbanks Fisheries Resource Office and our Regional Office as a Native Liaison Specialist. Jim is a great addition to our staff He has an extensive knowledge of Northern and Interior Alaska, biological data gathering techniques, subsistence harvest patterns, and rural community functions -- besides he's a nice guy. We were glad that we could offer him a permanent position.
In March ROS/Subsistence Coordinator David James accepted a position with the Alaska Department ofFish and Game as the Fairbanks Area Management Coordinator. Although we hated to loose David, we are hopeful that his transfer will encourage even better cooperation and communication between the refuge staff and the local office of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. On Sunday, March 17, the refuge staff held a going-away party for David and did an admirable job of sending him off with plenty of tools, equipment, and clothing to help him excel in his new position.
For several years, we have been seeking funds to hire one or more local-hire Refuge Information Technicians to help out with our field programs and serve as liaisons between the refuge staff and local villages. This year we finally received the funding and personnel ceiling for one of those positions. Paul Williams, Sr. ofBeaver was selected and became our first ever local hire RIT in September. Paul is well-known and respected throughout the Yukon Flats and is already proving to be a very valuable addition to our staff
In November, Region 7 welcomed back Greg McClellan. Greg accepted the ROS/Subsistence Coordinator position for the Yukon Flats, Kanuti, and Arctic Refuges. Greg came up from Brazoria NWR in Texas, but had previously held positions in our Regional Office Realty Division and at the Alaska Maritime NWR in Adak. It is a real pleasure for all of us who have known and worked with Greg over the years, to have him back in Alaska.
The refuge had an excellent Seasonal Biological Technician this summer. Laura Pomeroy worked for us from May through October. Laura was highly recommended (and rightly so) by the Izembek NWR staff, where she had worked the previous two summers. She maintained a positive, can-do attitude throughout the summer, and was an indispensable part of our summer field program. Many thanks Laura!
All of our staff deserves very high marks for their ability to work together cooperatively, to support one another, and to plan and accomplish all of the important refuge programs. 9
FWB Akaran banding northern pintail (8/96 Pomeroy).
WB Bertram with captured black bear (6/96 Heuer). 10
DRM Deines and Canada goose puppet meet a new friend (10/96 Bertram).
AT Gaston is all smiles (2/96 Sowl). 11
FMO Grissom fingerprints "suspicious" character (a.k.a. new employee R.I.T. Williams) (9/96 Heuer).
RM Heuer untangling ducks at Heart Lake (8/96 Sowl). 12
ROS/SC Greg McClellan removing redpolls from a mist net during mist netting training in Fairbanks (4/97 Sowl).
BT Pomeroy banding a yellow warbler at Canvasback Lake (Bertram 7 /96). 13
BT Sowl at the Junior Duck Stamp booth during National Wildlife Refuges Week at the Bentley Mall (10/96 Heuer).
WB/P Vivion fuels the plane (7/96 Sowl). 14
2. Youth Programs
After volunteering to work with us on several projects last summer, the refuge was very happy to be able to recruit Isaac Solomon for the RAPS program this summer. Isaac is a 15 year-old Fairbanks student, originally from Fort Yukon. He's very mature for his age, and we know he'll make a fine wildlife biologist or refuge manager someday. Just don't get him started talking about fishing unless you've got some time on your hands! Many thanks to Isaac for his excellent work.
Isaac Solomon releases a mallard at Tulebagh Lake (8/96 Bertram).
4. Volunteer Programs
Estimated value of volunteer time (215.5 hours) this year was $1,860. Our estimated cost for overseeing the volunteer program was $460. A list of volunteers and hours donated to refuge programs is provided in Table 3. One of our volunteers, Lorri Arthur, won a drawing held during the 1995 National Wildlife Refuge Week festivities which provided her and a guest (Ty Keltner) with the opportunity to volunteer on one of the field projects of the three Fairbanks-based refuges. She chose to help out at our M.A.P.S. station. 15
Table 3. VOLUNTEER HOURS, YUKON FLATS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, 1996.
NAME PROGRAM VOLUNTEER HOURS
Lorri Arthur banding MAPS station 18
Anna-Marie Barber banding MAPS station 12
Ellen Deines NWRW preparations; bird 24 banding training
Kahrin Deines sewing bird bags 8
Nickolas Deines NWRW preparations; bird 24 banding training
Arlin Fletcher clerical 1.5 ) Bonnie Gaston clerical 2 Ty Keltner banding MAPS station 14
Calvin Lensink waterfowl banding 64
Ernie Peter moose survey 24
Elizabeth Waggoner banding MAPS station 12
Judy Williams banding MAPS station 12
TOTAL HOURS VOLUNTEERED IN 1996 215.5
Volunteer Lorri Arthur assists BT Pomeroy at M.A.P.S. station (6/96 Bertram). 16
Cal Lensink with common snipe at Tulebagh Lake (8/96 Bertram).
5. Funding
Fiscal Year 1996 funding increased $92K from FY 1995 as shown in Table 4. This increase is largely a reflection of increased fixed costs due to our two new positions: a Local-hire Fish and Wildlife Biologist and a Local-hire Refuge Information Technician. Actual project funding (1200 and 9100 funds) decreased slightly from $210K in FY 95 to $193K in FY 96.
Our staff is responsible for managing, protecting, and conserving an 8.6 million-acre national treasure, the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. To meet our legal mandates, Service policies, and refuge goals and objectives, we receive an annual budget of about 11¢ per acre. If permanent staff salaries and other fixed expenses are subtracted, our annual operational budget is only 2¢ per acre. Obviously, this is not enough to conduct the wildlife inventories; routine law enforcement patrols; environmental education; and monitoring of harvest levels, special use activities, and contaminant levels to truly meet our mandates as public land managers. 17
Table 4. Funding levels, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, FY 92 to FY 96.
Refuge Op. $ Fire$ Subsist FY 1261-62 1241 & Contam. 1221 & MMS Total$ 1230 91XX 1261 1260 1260 92 449,000 185,000 72,000 723,000 93 440,400 186,000 122,000 34,000 782,400 94 534,400 187,000 82,000 8,000 721,000 95 539,000 176,000 20,000 71,000 13,000 819,000 96 673,000 146,000 74,000 18,000 911,000
6. Safety
On July 4, 1996, while transiting over the White Mountains between Fairbanks and the Yukon Flats, the station assigned Cessna 185 aircraft (N185CA) experienced a catastrophic engine failure. The resulting forced landing in mountainous terrain resulted in severe damage to the aircraft. Wildlife Biologist/Pilot Vivion was the sole occupant of the aircraft at the time of the accident, and he was uninjured.
WB/P Vivion was headed north to pick up a field crew at Canvasback Lake (90 miles north of Fairbanks) when the engine failed. He was able to communicate a Mayday call to Fairbanks Departure Control, who vectored another outbound aircraft to the site. The pilot of that aircraft was then able to relay information between our pilot (by then on the ground) and Fairbanks to effect the rescue. Mike was picked up from the site by an Alaska Fire Service contract helicopter within two hours of the accident.
The aircraft (which was float-equipped) was landed in a recently burned area, on a downhill slope, in very rough grass tussock type terrain. This was the most attractive terrain within gliding range. After sliding a short distance, the toe of the right float struck a large tussock, which caused the aircraft to cartwheel. After one somersault, the aircraft came to rest upright on its floats. 18
Resting place ofN185CA after crankshaft failure, 4 July, 1996 (7 /96 David Broadnax, OAS Safety).
Close up of the crumpled 185 Charlie Alpha (7/96 David Broadnax, OAS Safety). 19
Subsequent tear down of the engine revealed that the crankshaft had broken at the number two rod journal for unknown reasons. There were no apparent signs which would have forewarned of the impending failure. The aircraft had gone through a periodic maintenance inspection within the last twenty hours offlight time and had been the subject of maintenance work in the past two days for unrelated reasons. The National Transportation Safety Board · sent the crankshaft to its metallurgy lab for analysis. At the time of this report, results of that lab work have not yet been received. The Teledyne Continental Motors I0-520 engine, as installed in this aircraft, has some history of crankshaft failures. The manufacturer and the NTSB were both present at the engine tear down. The final NTSB report on the accident has not been released as of this date.
The slow speed of the aircraft at touchdown, the dissipation of energy by distal parts of the aircraft (right float, left wing, and tail), the superb B.A.S. shoulder harness system installed in the aircraft, and the expertise of the pilot were the keys to preventing personal injury in this accident. The entire passenger cabin remained intact during the rollover, also contributing to passenger safety.
Our thanks go to Frontier Flying Service, Alaska Fire Service, ERA helicopters, the Air Traffic Controllers at Fairbanks Departure Control, and the Flight Service Specialists at Fairbanks Flight Service Station for their assistance in completing a fast and efficient rescue of the pilot. Rod King of Migratory Bird Management in Fairbanks assisted by picking up the field crew the next day.
While the aircraft was deemed to be a total loss, we are thankful that this engine failure did not occur in a worse situation such as at low level on takeoff over obstacles with a full load of passengers. The situation can nearly always be worse. The most important thing is that no one was injured. Thankfully, the rest of our year was somewhat less eventful by comparison, at least in a safety context.
Several new David Clark active noise canceling aviation headsets were procured for the refuge aircraft. These new type headsets greatly reduce the potential for hearing loss from exposure to aircraft noise.
As usual, the entire staff, including seasonal personnel, completed the full range of required field safety training, most of which was conducted in late May and early June. Routine training includes aircraft safety training, watercraft safety training, first aid, CPR, bear and firearms safety training. Some of these courses do not require that every employee attend each year (aircraft safety has a three-year refresher requirement, for example), but classes are presented in Fairbanks each year to ensure that our employees have the opportunity to keep their training up to date.
WBIP Vivian once again presented an aircraft safety training session to the Koyukuk! 20
Nowitna NWR staff in early June. In addition, he presented two aircraft safety refresher courses and a basic aircraft safety course in Fairbanks during the year.
The Yukon Flats sent WB/P Vivion to the Bear/Firearms instructor refresher training presented in Anchorage this year and coordinated by the Regional Office Refuges personnel. The training was excellent and a great improvement over previous sessions. Our thanks to Tony Booth of the Regional Office, Refuges, and Steve Ebbert of the Alaska Maritime Refuge for their hard work to make this session as useful and productive as it was.
WB/P Vivion coordinated and conducted the firearms safety requalification for Fairbanks employees in May, assisted by RM Heuer, FWB Akaran, along with Jeff Melegari and Tevis Underwood, both of the Fairbanks Fisheries Resources Office.
Master MSDS holders were procured and installed for our aircraft hangar, the Fort Yukon warehouse, and our warehouse space in Fairbanks.
Shotguns aren't very effective against the feared Rana sylvaticus (8/96 Pomeroy).
7. Technical Assistance
WB/P Vivion was again invited to be a guest speaker at the Aircraft Owner's and Pilot's Association annual convention in San Jose, California in mid-October. At his own expense, 21
Mike presented a seminar entitled "Weather From the Cockpit." The presentation focused on weather flying decisions made by pilots while in flight. Two sessions of this seminar were presented to a total audience of approximately 700 attendees.
Military aircraft operations continue to be an issue in northern and eastern Alaska, with the continuation of the Air Force's Cope Thunder exercises in addition to routine training. WB/P Vivion continued to serve as a member of a committee to evaluate research and monitoring projects and proposals pertinent to the military flight activities. The Air Force and Interior Department appeared to be very close to signing the Record Of Decision (ROD) for the Cope Thunder EIS by the end of the year. The ROD includes numerous environmental constraints and requirements which will hopefully protect wildlife resources in the affected areas and help to separate military and civil aircraft.
The mentor pilot program was developed by the Service in cooperation with the Office of Aircraft Services to enable experienced Service pilots who are also current Certified Flight Instructors to fly with other pilots in Service aircraft providing training while accomplishing Service missions. Both current OAS-carded pilots and pilots-in-training may use this program to gain experience in a new (to them) aircraft type, to brush up on infrequently used skills, to learn new skills related to natural resource flying, or simply to improve their flying skills. WB/P Vivion has participated as an instructor in this program from its inception. This year, he flew with five different pilots from FWS and the National Park Service for varying lengths of time.
F. HABITAT MANAGE:rvt:ENT
1. General
Several factors contribute to the Yukon Flats' history as the most productive waterfowl habitat per acre in Alaska. The refuge extends 200 miles across the flood plain of the Yukon River and includes an estimated 40,000 ponds, lakes, and oxbows. In addition, ten major rivers and numerous streams comprising almost 25,000 miles dissect the flood plain before emptying into the Yukon River. These features combined with the periodic flooding of the Flats by the Yukon River, low evaporative rate, presence of permafrost, occurrence of wildland fires, and long, warm summer days all contribute to the abundance and diversity of wetlands and subsequent high utilization by waterfowl and other wetland-dependent wildlife. In addition to these innumerable wetlands, the Flats contain extensive acreage of interspersed white spruce, black spruce, paper birch, and aspen forest. Alpine tundra is located in the White Mountains to the south and the foothills of the Brooks Range to the north. An entire ecosystem representative of the northern boreal forest and the alpine tundra is found within the refuge. 22
2. Wetlands
The Yukon Flats, Alaska's largest interior basin, was identified as a major breeding ground for waterfowl in the early 1950's. Subsequent studies confirmed the Yukon Flats region as Alaska's primary waterfowl breeding ground with an estimated population of 1.6 million ducks, 10,000 geese, 11,000 sandhill cranes, and an estimated 15,000 Pacific loons. Today the Yukon Flats is considered one of the most productive waterfowl breeding grounds in North America. During the statewide waterfowl production surveys, it was estimated that an average of over 200,000 ducklings were produced between 1990 and 1992. The Prairie Pothole and Aspen Parkland regions of the U.S . and Canada can yield a higher density of waterfowl on an annual basis, but the Yukon Flats region has a higher sustained rate of production. In years when portions of these southern regions are dry, ducks will overfly them and nest on the Yukon Flats.
6. Other Habitats
Steppe bluff plant communities on south-facing bluffs along the Porcupine River were inventoried for rare and endemic plants in June by Arctic NWR botanists Mike Emers and Janet Jorgenson and Barbara and David Murray of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. The bluff system extends 12 miles and lies within Arctic and Yukon Flats refuges. Steppe bluff communities are dominated by sage (Artemisia frigida) and grasses (Agropyron spicatum and Calamagrostis purpurescens) and are thought to be relict plant communities from the Pleistocene ( 10,000 to 1.5 million years before present).
Steppe bluff plant community on the Porcupine River (6/96 Emers). 23
Limestone bluffs in this area have an especially unique and diverse flora. In addition to the sage and grass species, these bluff communities contain numerous phlox (Phlox richardsonii and P. hoodii) and alyssum (Alyssum americanum). Barbara Murray found 80 lichen species, 15 liverworts, and 83 mosses on the bluffs. Also present are several species that are rare throughout their ranges, including a former Category 2 species, Eriogonum flavum.
This steppe bluff community can be found nowhere else in North America, and possibly the world. Within these bluffs are several populations of two yet unnamed species that are new to science: a fleabane (Erigeron) and a liverwort in the family Aytoniaceae, genus Asterella. Also present are two species not previously identified in North America: a lichen (Psora testacea) and a moss (Microbryum curvicolle).
A new species of Erigeron was discovered on the Porcupine River (6/96 Emers). 24
9. Fire Management
Wildland Fires
Wildland fire and flooding have created an obvious mosaic of plant communities on the refuge, which supports a diverse wildlife community, and fire is critical in maintaining healthy wildlife populations. The Yukon Flats is an excellent example of a fire dependent ecosystem, which results from low precipitation, high summer temperatures, presence of highly flammable fuel types, and high incidence of lightning (up to 2,000 strikes in a 24-hour period). Individual fires commonly burn several hundred thousand acres. Figure 3 displays the perimeters of all recorded fires greater than 1,000 acres since 1950, showing the dominance of fire as a natural force.
Fire A483 following and burning readily in mature spruce, but not burning at all in shorter spruce, which burned in 1950 (6/96 Grissom).
Fire management on the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge follows guidelines presented in the refuge's fire management plan as well as the Upper Yukon/Tanana Area Interagency Fire Management Plan. Lands are assigned a fire protection level based on values at risk, with human safety being the top priority in all fire management decisions. Critical Protection zones include villages and automatically receive the highest priority. · co
Scale: Miles I I I I 0 10 20 30 40 50 D 1950-1959 • 1960-1984 D 1985-1995 • 1996 898,000 ac 950,000 ac 2,187,000 ac 156,019 ac
Figure 3. Fire boundaries since 1950. Fires in 1996 shown in green. 26
Full Protection zones are around the critical protection areas and may also include historic sites or high-value resources, such as commercial timber. Fires there are usually aggressively attacked and fought until the fire is declared out. Modified Protection zones are often around Full Protection areas, or may be designated for areas where large fires are not wanted. Fires in Modified Protection zones are usually suppressed by fairly aggressive action early in the season, but later fires are often treated as Limited Protection fires.
Limited Protection zones are located in the more remote sections of the refuge, where values at risk do not warrant the cost of aggressive suppression, and fires there are normally monitored. This strategy reduces suppression costs, keeps suppression forces available for high priority areas, and helps maintain a near natural fire regime over much of the refuge, which increases habitat diversity and helps maintain productivity.
Questions are continually raised about increasing protection levels because of the importance of firefighting to the local economy and because some people believe that fire harms plant and animal communities. However, many people understand and research has shown that healthy plant and animal communities in Interior Alaska require fire. The refuge staff will continue activities to maintain or improve protection level designations. The refuge now has approximately 127,000 acres (less than 2%) in full protection, 1,127,000 acres (13%) in modified protection, and 7,226,000 acres (85%) in limited protection. If native lands are also included, the full protection area increases dramatically by about 2,046,000 acres, modified protection by about 627,000 acres, and limited action area by 23,000 acres (Figure 4).
Discussions begun in 1995 about changing up to 140,000 acres ofModified and Full protection areas in the western part of the refuge to Limited Protection continued this year. FMO Grissom visited with personnel from the Alaska Fire Service (AFS) and Bureau efLand Management (BLM) and representatives of Stevens Village. BLM is planning to drop the Full Protection designation in most of the pipeline corridor, which requires some adjustment to tie the new boundary into defensible fuel breaks. This is part of an interagency effort to adjust suppression level on 1-2 million acres in the area. A proposal was then sent to Stevens Village, Doyon Ltd., and AFS in October.
Fire Season Summary
Although spring breakup was late this year, fire activity in the state started early, indicating a busy year. Snow cover persisted over a week longer than in 1995. Snow coverage was about 75% on the western part of the refuge on May 9, whereas it was about 10% coverage on the same date last year. Early problem fires on Kenai Refuge, in southern Alaska (Miller's Reach Fire, a.k.a. The Big Lake Fire), and near Central made it look like a harsh summer was in store for the refuge. It started out that way but quickly calmed down. May and early June were fairly dry, but rains lowered fire danger later (see Figure 5 and Section B, Climatic Conditions). Fourteen fires burned about 156,000 acres during the year, slightly more than average (Table 5, Figure 3). D Full and Critical Protection
D Modified Protection
Scale: Miles I I I I 0 10 20 30 40 50
Figure 4. Fire Protection Level within Yukon Flats NWR boundary. Areas of Full Protection less than 200 acres not shown. 28
Table 5. Number ofFires and Acreage Burned on Yukon Flats NWR, 1981-1996. I Year II Fires II Acres 101 Year II Fires II Acres I 1981* 7 611 1989 4 9 1982* 5 9 1990 19 355,153 1983* 24 1,622 1991 22 292,072 1984 15 169 1992 10 42,003 1985 12 166 573 1993 13 92,590 1986 10 46,156 1994 12 22,535 1987 9 18,084 1995 6 401 1988 49 1,152,313 1996 14 156,019 TOTAL 231 2,346,319 •• L tj,i·• i. ;•c;•.t( Jt AVE. (per yr.) 14.4 146,645 < •.········ i < ·..• * Prior to interagency fire management plans, all fires were treated as being in Full Suppression zones and were suppressed if possible.
All fires in 1996 were caused by lightning. Six fires were attacked and extinguished. One fire was initial attacked, but it escaped initial attack and was managed with a containment strategy. Five fires had suppression action taken to protect specific sites, and two fires received only a monitoring response (suppression actions are summarized in Table 6).
Late May and early June were fairly dry, and human-caused fires presented major problems in other parts of the state. On the refuge, lightning started 12 of the refuge's fires (86%) within a one week period (June 16-22). Spotty showers kept most fires fairly calm until one windy weekend, when about 40% of the fire season's total acreage was burned. From Friday the 21st to Monday the 24th, six fires burned about 69,000 acres. That acreage is a rough estimate because smoke limited visibility, and surveillance staffwere quite busy. Figure 5 shows fire danger at Fort Yukon as a combination of measures of fuel moisture (Buildup Index) and fire spread potential (Initial Spread Index) during June and July. Fire danger and fire spread potential were both very high during that June 21-24 period. Other than that time period, one or both measures were low, which meant that major fires were unlikely. 29
ITable 6. Summary ofFires on Yukon Flats NWR during CY96. I AFS Fire Date Dis- Refuge Other Other Number covered I Cost Protection Acres Owners & Owners' Comments (FWS #) Date Out Burned Protection Acres A460 6/16 not avail.* Limited 29,680 State, L 18,920 aerial ignition to help confine fire and (7563) 8/20 protect allotments and cabin
A472 6/17 not avail.* Modified 2,260 Doyon, L 830 aerial ignition to help confine fire and (7559) 8/20 protect allotment Limited 1,620 State, L 920
A476 6/17 1,660 Modified 1.5 0 extinguished by 4 smokejumpers (7613) 6/18
A483 6/17 71,110 Modified 192 ANWR,M 576 1 load of retardant and burnout by hand to (7565) 7112 protect FAA and refuge radio repeaters; Doyon, M 1,060 later mop up by smokejumpers to prevent flare-up during high fire danger period
A493 6/18 9,580 Modified 1 0 extinguished by 4 smokejumpers; (7573) 6/19 unburned island in 1994 burn
A495 6/18 17,960 Full 2.5 0 directly adjacent to A498; extinguished by (7568) 6/21 4 smokejumpers A498 6/18 38,121 Full 3 0 extinguished by 8 smokejumpers and 1 (7570) 6/21 load of retardant A506 6/19 0 Limited 180 0 surveillance only (7624) 6/24 30
AFS Fire Date Dis- Refuge Other Other Number covered I Cost Protection Acres Owners & Owners' Comments (FWS #) Date Out Burned Protection Acres I I A507 6/19 82,720 Limited 33,330 private 160 helitack used portable pump to save cabin (7564) 9/13 on allotment; crew cut line around another allotment; otherwise monitored
A508 6/19 6,190 Limited 41,410 0 surveillance only (7566) 9/12
A521 6/21 537,270 Full 7,581 Doyon, F 14,083 initial attack failed (see text); used aerial (7567) 9/18 ignition and handlines for containment Modified 97 Village, F 904
A535 6/22 5,630 Modified 0.1 0 extinguished by 2 smokejumpers (7574) 6/24
A607 7/7 3,550 Modified 0.5 0 extinguished by 4 smokejumpers; grass (7576) 7/8 fire in 1991 burn
A633 7/11 40,271 Limited 39,660 0 2 cabin protection actions by (7577) 9/13 smokejumpers (see text)
A642 7/17 1,660 False 0 0 probably smoke from A633 (7630) -- Alarm
1...••.•..•. ·...••.•...... ·.··. ·. I •·<.·••••.·> L•••·•·••··••··•···••.•.•i.•.•····•.••·•·····••••••·.• << .. .. I TOTAL . .
Smoke column from Fire A521 with extreme burning conditions (see Figure 5). The fire viewed from Fort Yukon, June 22, 7:12p.m. (time stamp is offby 1 hour) (6/96 Grissom).
16 ...-.. -140 :::::> 14 en ..._.m 12 >< >< Q) Q)120 "'0 "'0 10 c c "'0 a. 8(\'l ::J1oo ~--: ~ "'0- 60. en
0 June 1 June 7 June 14 June 21 June 28 July 5 July 12 July 19 July 26 July 31
Figure 5. Buildup Index (BUI) and Initial Spread Index (lSI) at Fort Yukon, June 1 to July 31, 1996. BUI is a measure of fuel dryness or "fire danger." lSI is a measure of wind effect or the speed of fire spread. 32
The most noteworthy fire of the season was A521 , which was discovered on June 21 near Chalkyitsik in Full Protection. Thirty-two smokejumpers, four loads of retardant, and the Fort Yukon Emergency Firefighter crew were put on the fire the first day, but were unable to catch the fire. The strategy was switched to indirect attack using aerial ignition, beginning June 23. The approach of an Arctic front had fanned fire activity, but its passage calmed the fire with cooler temperatures and showers.
Fire A521 was then placed in monitor status, waiting for proper conditions to continue the burnout. Some work on improving old firelines and cutting a new line around an allotment was conducted. Weather kept this fire relatively calm until it was covered with snow.
Smokejumpers near helispot at west end of Fire A521 , 6:38p.m., June 21, four hours after discovery. Note thick, decadent, stunted white spruce, about 130-185 years old. A few old pieces of birch bark were found, indicating that birch grew here long ago. Note sky covered by smoke (6/96 Grissom). 33
AFS FCO Gil Eggleston on handline cut to protect an allotment on Fire A521. Permafrost was 4-12 inches below the soil surface. The line was 4,000 feet long and drained downhill into Ohtig Lake. The trench was filled soon after (7 /96 Grissom).
The rest of the summer was characterized by recurrent, spotty showers with occasional lightning. There were only two more ignitions on the refuge. Fire A633 started on July 11 and was quiet for about a week. From Friday, July 19, until Monday, July 22, strong west winds caused that fire to go from 2,400 acres to 28,870 acres. Figure 5 shows the high winds of that day. Six smokejumpers were deployed on July 20 to protect a permitted cabin near Fire A633. They wrapped the cabin with fire shelter material and burned out around it. Another cabin received similar treatment when threatened on June 26.
In general, coordination with AFS was exemplary and exceptions were rare. Smoke jumpers, however, were deployed on two Modified Protection fires that probably required only surveillance (A493 and A607). Better coordination with AFS could have saved money and not put the jumpers at risk.
Aerial ignition was the appropriate tool on three fires, and AFS was effective in using it. It was used on Fire A472 to protect Theodore Stevens' allotment and cabin; on Fire A460 to protect Rick Hardy's cabin and four allotments; and on Fire A521 as an alternative to a failed initial attack, to protect Chalkyitsik and cabins and allotments. Aerial ignition was effective in meeting objectives such as protecting identified sites and in containing fires; was safer than 34 ground attack for Fire A521, which was burning under severe conditions; was much more economical than other alternatives in those situations, and likely saved millions of dollars on Fire A521 alone; and required minimal commitment of resources, at a time when there were 27 fires burning in the zone.
Excellent mosaic achieved by Fire A472 near Stevens Village (7/96 Grissom).
Other Fire Season Activities
After being trained as a fire investigator, FMO Grissom found out that it was a growth industry, being dispatched to nine fires during the summer. In May, FMO Grissom was dispatched to the Hidden Creek Fire on Kenai Refuge as a fire investigator trainee. The ignition source was not found, but evidence indicated that discarded smoking materials were responsible. At the time, the Division of Forestry was swamped, and Perry was also dispatched to two other small fires while there. One of those was caused by children smoking and one by a burn pile.
Later in May, FMO Grissom was dispatched to a fire near Eagle. That fire was caused by a campfire abandoned last fall, probably by moose hunters. It burned throughout the winter and was burning the entire duff layer, creating a 2.5 acre pile of downed white spruce. 35
During June, FMO Grissom was dispatched to Fort Yukon twice to investigate fires. The first burned about 2 miles from town. The fire was human-caused, but no specific cause was identified because of heavy fire suppression traffic in the origin area. The fire started along a 4-wheeler trail. The second fire burned a driftwood pile on a sandbar of the Porcupine River. Specific cause was not identified because the pile had been broken apart and spread out in order to put the fire out. Evidence indicates that it was started by someone cutting logs for a fish wheel. Visiting fish wheels nearby produced no leads. The salmon were running, and just about everyone was running up and down the rivers.
In August, FMO Grissom was again dispatched to a fire on the Kenai Refuge. Numerous leads were available, but despite several interviews and many hours on the phone, the group responsible was not identified. The fire was attributed to an abandoned campfire left by hunters. While there, Grissom also investigated another fire that was started by an abandoned campfire left by people boating on the Kenai River.
Training ·
During the year, FMO Grissom attended Field Observer/Display Processor (I-244) in Fairbanks, and Ignition Operations (Rx-96) and Smoke Management (Rx-450) in Boise, Idaho. In addition, he completed the National Wildfire Investigation Training Program at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia.
FMO Grissom commented on the new annual firefighter safety refresher course, and he also wrote a lesson plan for the session on wildfire investigation he will be teaching at two law enforcement refreshers.
As the Service representative on the training committee of the Alaska Wildfire Coordinating Group, FMO Grissom attended a committee meeting to set the coming year's training schedule in October in Anchorage and attended a tele-conference in November.
Presuppression
The refuge continued to work toward achieving hazard reduction projects. FMO Grissom spoke with representatives from AFS, Doyon, and the villages of Chalkyitsik, Stevens Village, and Fort Yukon about hazard reduction burns. Lightning ignited a fire (Fire A521) in the large spruce forest outside Chalkyitsik, causing some tense moments (see previous discussion). The fire, however, did not completely remove the hazard so presuppression discussions will continue.
FMO Grissom provided AFS with cabin inventory and/or location information for 21 existing permitted cabins and two new cabin permits. 36
Prescribed Burning Program
About 85% of refuge lands are within limited suppression zones, and about 37% of the refuge has burned in the last 50 years, greatly reducing the need to apply prescribed fire. Prescribed fire may be used for hazardous fuel reduction and to meet resource objectives. Refuge prescribed burns were a 3,500-acre hazardous fuel reduction burn around an Air Force seismic site, conducted in 1994, and a 1,200-acre burn conducted in 1989 for resource objectives and to study fire behavior and fire effects. Future emphasis for the refuge prescribed burn program will continue to seek cooperative opportunities with local villages to reduce hazardous fuels.
Fire Effects Monitoring and Vegetation/Fuel Mapping
The refuge's size and the rapidly changing vegetation mosaic, from succession and new fires, makes acquisition of a good GIS map critical to fire management decision-making. Similarity in fuel types between Yukon Flats and Kanuti and Arctic Refuges will allow the Yukon Flats map to serve as a basis for the other refuges.
Refuge GIS Specialist Barbara Boyle, Arctic NWR's botany staff (Jorgenson, Emers, and Reitz), and FMO Grissom classified 140 plots and photographed six flight lines. Prep work for selecting sites included examining remote images, fire maps, and data from two previous summers. The project is a cooperative effort with 1260 and 9100 funds provided by the Yukon Flats NWR, Arctic NWR, and the Regional Office. The refuge acquired eight Thematic Mapper scenes (4 summer/4 winter) to help build a current fuel map, because 25% of the refuge has burned since the old images were taken. FMO Grissom represented the refuge at a meeting in Anchorage in December to draft a Region 7 Refuge GIS Implementation Plan.
No vegetation sampling was conducted at the refuge's permanent study transects this year; the funds usually allocated for this work were used for development of the refuge vegetation base map instead. The final report for vegetation and fuel mapping work at Marten Island was completed.
With FMO Grissom and AFS staff, USDA Forest Service researchers put in three fuel loading/consumption plots in Fire A633 and resampled them after consumption. The researchers have had a difficult time putting in plots that get burned. With fairly consistent fire activity on the Yukon Flats, they may have found an ideal laboratory. Consumption was found to be 6.4 tons/acre ofwoody fuels, 5 tons/acre of foliage, 4.3 tons/acre of moss and lichen, and 7.5 tons/acre of duff, giving a total of23.2 tons/acre of consumption. Assuming fairly similar fuels throughout the fire, and from the air it seemed fairly uniform, the 39,660- acre fire consumed nearly a million tons of biomass. Because the fire was wind-driven and duff moistures were moderate, less than half of the duff and moss burned. 37
Had the fire burned under drier conditions, another 100,000 tons could have been consumed. Although it may not seem like it, a natural fire regime helps reduce smoke problems. Even though this and similar fires produce large amounts of smoke, smoke production is relatively low, and its release is spread out over several years. Under "full suppression" policy, most fires are kept small, but eventually, under extreme conditions, suppression forces fail to catch a fire or two. These fires become huge and bum deep, producing more smoke per acre than "moderate" fires. They also release all the smoke in a relatively short period of time. Fire is inevitable in this ecosystem, and the old "pay now or pay later" adage is definitely true.
Botanist Bev Reitz on one of the ground-truthing plots for the Yukon Flats vegetation base map (9/96 B. Boyle).
Fire Effects/Small Mammal Surveys
Ongoing projects to monitor fire effects and document fire history and fire regime on the refuge help monitor effectiveness of fire management strategies and complement fuel mapping work. FMO Grissom took slabs from numerous trees at several sites to determine stand age and time since last fire. With stand replacement fires, documenting fire return interval on specific sites is very difficult because new fires erase old fire history instead of adding to it. 38
No small mammal trapping was conducted at the permanent study transects this year. However, staff members (mainly RAPS Student Solomon) entered data from seven years of small mammal trapping into a computer spreadsheet. Once all of the data is entered, it will be available for analysis.
Education
Fire education is an important component of the refuge's environmental education program. Fire-related education activities are discussed in Section H.2.
Administration
In February, RM Heuer, DRM Deines, and FMO Grissom attended a Northern Ecoregion fire management meeting. Also present were GARD Pospahala, CR Constantino, DARD Corin, RFMC Vanderlinden, Refuge Managers from refuges in the ecoregion, and the other two FMOs in the region. Budgets and policy changes were the main topics. The Regional Office promised to investigate filling a long-requested assistant FMO position, either shared between the three Fairbanks-based refuges or shared with the National Park Service.
In October, FMO Grissom and RM Heuer attended the annual fall fire review with other land managers and AFS staff Differences in opinion about suppression in Modified Protection areas and about use of aerial ignition for initial attack were expressed and will hopefully be resolved before next fire season. In November FMO Grissom attended a Region 7 FMO meeting in Fairbanks.
FMO Grissom submitted comments on the proposed Interior fire management policy. Departmental and Service policy is being changed to comply with the new federal policy on wildland fire. He also submitted comments to Aransas NWR about their fire effects monitoring plan.
Other
In October, FMO Grissom attended a meeting to discuss placement, operation, and maintenance of remote automated weather stations (RAWS) with staff from AFS, the National Weather Service, and other land management agencies. Plans were discussed for "sharing" stations, putting out warehoused stations, and moving some stations. 39
G. WILDLIFE
1. Wildlife Diversity
Birds
Refuge personnel are encouraged to record general observations ofbirds while working on all field projects. Observations may include both visual sightings and vocal recognition. Species checklists were maintained between May 27 and August 17 at six field sites including the Beaver Creek black bear capture site; Canvasback, Tulebagh, and Mallard Lakes; Waterfowl Production Plot G near Beaver Creek; and Marten Island. Bird observations were also recorded during one visit to the Porcupine River.
Ninety-seven ~pecies were observed during 60 field days. Since several field projects overlapped, the total number of observation days was 87 (an observation day is a day during which bird observations were recorded at a particular field site). The frequencies with which various species were observed during the 1996 field season are listed in Table 7.
Twenty-four species (25% of the total species) were observed during more than half of the field days bird observations were recorded. The three most frequently observed species (observed on more than 75% ofthe days) were American wigeon, common snipe, and American robin. Sandhill crane was the most frequently observed neotropicallandbird migrant, while common raven was the most observed resident species. Swainson's thrush was the most frequently observed neotropical migrant passerine with a winter range entirely or primarily south of the U.S./Mexico border. Other frequently observed species included mallard, lesser yellowlegs, green-winged teal, northern shoveler, northern pintail, lesser scaup, rusty blackbird, gray jay, boreal chickadee, redpoll, yellow-rumped warbler, dark-eyed junco, red-necked grebe, arctic tern, alder flycatcher, solitary sandpiper, yellow warbler, and bohemian waxwing.
Field crews were also encouraged to record notes on the breeding status for bird species they observed. Indications ofbreeding included song, territorial or courtship displays, agitated or defensive adults, adults carrying food, active nests, dependent or recently fledged young, or presence of a well-developed cloacal protuberance/brood patch in passerine species. Fifty-one species, over half of the total species observed, demonstrated some noticeable indication of breeding activity, and nests or young were observed for 34 species. Migratory species for which signs ofbreeding activity were observed are mentioned in Sections G.2 through G.7. 40
of bird observations for the 1996 field seaso Yukon Flats
FREQ
8
8
7
6
6
6
6
5
21 2
21 2
19 LONG-BILLED DOWITCHER 2
19 AMERICAN PIPIT 2
TREE SWALLOW 18 GREATER SCAUP
GRAY-CHEEKED THRUSH 16 RUDDY DUCK
VARIED THRUSH 16
CANVASBACK 38 THREE-TOED WOODPECKER 10 WILSON'S WARBLER
WHITE-CROWNED 37 SWANspp! 8 SPARROW
' Number of days species was observed divided by 87 total observation days (crews were in the field 60 days, but some projects overlapped in time). 2 Consists of 15% common goldeneye and 5% goldeneye sp. 3 Consists of 10% red-tailed hawk, 1% rough-legged hawk, and 8% Buteo sp. • Consists of 2% swa 2% tundra swan and 3% swan 41
Breeding activity was observed for several resident species. At the Beaver Creek bear capture site, the nest of a northern hawk owl was found in a birch tree on an island on May 28, and a common raven nest was observed in a spruce tree on the edge of the lake on June 3. At the Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station, a female boreal chickadee with a brood patch was captured on June 20, and an adult chickadee was observed feeding fledglings on July 2.
Northern Hawk Owl (Bertram 5/96).
Mammals
Species of mammals that were observed by field crews on the Yukon Flats Refuge in 1996 included: moose, caribou, Dall sheep, black bear, grizzly bear, wolf, red fox, marten, mink, short-tailed weasel (ermine), muskrat, beaver, red squirrel, snowshoe hare, Yukon Flats ground squirrel, yellow-cheeked vole, meadow vole, and humans. 42
2. Endangered and/or Threatened Species
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) surveys were conducted cooperatively with the Arctic Refuge along the Porcupine River July 13-19. Fourteen adults and eight young, including five successful nesting pairs, were observed on the Yukon Flats portion of the survey (Table 8). All eight young were banded. The ages of young observed at the nest sites ranged from 18 to 25 days old. A new nest site was located on a silt bluff at Site 1505 on July 19.
Peregrine falcons were also observed during the summer at Canvasback, Mallard, and Tulebagh Lakes. The number of days peregrine falcon were observed during the summer is mentioned in Table 7, Section G.1.
Table 8. Comparison of peregrine productivity for the Porcupine River, 1982-1996, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Alaska.
Location 1985 1986 1987 1988
Site 1350 pr
Site 1370 pr
Site 1395 pr pr 1 ad
Site 1420 pr
Site 1435
Site 1445
Site 1505
Site 1540
Site 1660
3 2 2 3 2 4
2 2 3 4 4 7 5 5
Total# obs 4 4 4 6 12 9 4 5 11 9
Abbreviations are and ad = adult 43
3. Waterfowl
Breeding Population Surveys
Aerial breeding pair surveys were first initiated on the Yukon Flats NWR in 1952 (Lensink 1965). The Division of Migratory Bird Management (MBM) standardized methods for the survey in 1956 and has since conducted the survey annually in late May on the Yukon Flats, known as Stratum 4. Yukon Flats NWR staff recognized in 1983 that the traditional flight line sample under represented both refuge lands and available wetland habitats in Stratum 04 (McLean 1992). As a result, the refuge initiated an expanded aerial breeding pair survey in 1984 with the primary objective of monitoring annual waterfowl breeding pair trends and waterfowl density distributions on Service lands. The survey increased representation of Service lands and sample size by about 70% and 50%, respectively. Yukon Flats NWR staff conducted surveys from 1984-1989 and again in 1994 and 1996 to supplement MBM surveys. A refuge survey was not conducted in 1995 due to project scheduling conflicts. The following is a summary of the 1996 refuge breeding pair survey which was conducted May 30-31. Some comparisons will be made with the Division of Migratory Bird waterfowl breeding pair survey which was conducted May 23 (Conant and Groves 1996).
The results of the 1996 refuge breeding pair survey indicated below average populations for all species except green-winged teal (Table 9, Figure 6). Canvasback estimates were the lowest recorded since 1987. Estimates were down 13% for dabblers, 25% for divers, 16% for scoters, and 19% for all ducks compared with the eight year mean ( 1984 to 1996).
Pair of white-winged scoters (6/96 Bertram). 44
The Division ofMigratory Bird waterfowl breeding pair survey also estimated similar populations trends with below average estimates for all classes of ducks (Table 9, Figure 7). Canvasback only comprised 22% of the estimated Alaska population in 1996 (the 25 year mean is 53% of the Alaska total, the 1995 estimate was 72% of the Alaska total).
Table 9. Comparison of 1996 and historic waterfowl breeding pair population estimates for the Yukon Flats Production Stratum 1984-1996.
Yukon Flats Refuge Survey Division of Migratory Birds Survey Species 1984-1996 1996 %change 1984-1996 1996 %change
Mallard 62.0 57.2 i 8% 89.7 116.1 130%
American 116.9 72.2 i38% 200 214.8 17% Wigeon
Green- 84.0 116.7 139% 104.7 142.7 !36% winged Teal
Northern 40.7 33.8 i 17% 121.6 99.9 Ll8% Shoveler
Northern 89.1 63.7 i 29% 199.8 92.5 154% Pintail
Gadwall 2.9 .5 183% 3.9
Redhead 26.1 .4
Canvasback 45.1 29.3 135% 58 34.1 i 41%
Scaup spp. 257.0 216.2 116% 315.9 236.1 i 25%
Ringneck 4.4 9.8 10.3 T 5%
Goldeneye 14.4 .6 186% 14.5 13.6 16%
Bufflehead 18.7 11.7 137% 14.5 16.6 I 14% 45
Figure 6. BREEDING POPULATION ESTIMATES, YUKON FLATS NWR 1994 and 1996- Conducted by Yukon Flats NWR. 700 667 600
c.o ~ 400 til c.o ~ 300 .t:: -200 100
0 1994 1996 ~ D MALL ~ NO PI [ill CANV D. LESC • TOTAL ~
Figure 7. BREEDING POPULATION ESTIMATES, YUKON FLATS NWR 1990-1996- Conducted by Division of Migratory Birds. 1400
1200 1112 1099 1051 1029 1000 911 c.o ~ 800 m 679 c.o ~ 600 .t:: 400 - 26 200
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
~ D MALL ~ NOPI [l] CANV [J LESC • TOTAL ] 46
A waterfowl brood survey was conducted on Canvasback Lake July 4 and 24. Broods were identified from seven species (Table 10).
Table 10. Results of Canvasback Lake waterfowl production survey, 1996.
Early Survey - July 4 Late Survey - July 24
Species Broody Known Partial Total # Broody Known Partial Total # Hens Broods Broods Broods Adults Hens Broods Broods Broods Adults Mallard 2 2 4 2 1 20
Amer. 15 7 22 171 6 11 10 21 276 Wigeon
Green- 2 2 2 1 6 winged Teal Northern 78 1 1 2 3 32 Shoveler Northern 1 Pintail
Canvas 1 5 6 11 7 1 8 43 back Scaup spp 143 7+ 7 267
White- 13 4 4 175 winged Scoter
Buffle 3 head
Golden 1 eye Ruddy 1 Duck Unident. 1 1 Ill . \:iij.!]iill·]j:jji·ll Homed 1 2 3 21 18 14 32 117 Grebe
Red 3 3 13 11 11 32 necked Grebe Pacific 6 3 Loon
Common 3 Loon Sandhill 2 6 Crane 47
General Field Observations
Two waterfowl nests were found during the summer: an American wigeon nest on an island at the Beaver Creek black bear capture site (May 28) and one canvasback nest at Canvasback Lake (June 13). Also, adults with young were observed for the following species: greater white-fronted goose, Canada goose, mallard, northern pintail, northern shoveler, American wigeon, canvasback, lesser scaup, white-winged scoter, and common goldeneye. See Sections G .1 and G.7 for additional information on waterfowl observations.
4. Marsh and Water Birds
On June 18, two active homed grebe nests and one red-necked grebe nest were observed on Arte Lake at Plot G just south of Beaver Creek. Adult homed grebes were still on the nests on June 29, but it was not clear if the red-necked grebe nest was still active. A large number of red-necked and homed grebe families were observed at Canvasback Lake during July. See Sections G.1, G.3, and G.7 for additional information on marsh and waterbird observations.
5. Shorebirds, Gulls, and Terns
Immature mew gull at Tulebagh Lake (8/96 Bertram).
A common snipe nest was discovered in sedge meadow at Canvasback Lake on June 11, and two lesser yellowlegs nests were found at the M.A.P.S. station on June 13. A spotted 48 sandpiper nest was found on a gravel bar near point# 16 ofthe Porcupine River Breeding Bird Survey on June 14. Displaying (and later agitated) lesser yellowlegs, solitary sandpipers, spotted sandpipers, and common snipe were observed at the Porcupine River, Canvasback Lake, Marten Island, and Plot G during June and July.
Both arctic terns and Bonaparte's gulls were apparently breeding at Canvasback Lake. Two Bonaparte's gulls appeared to be exhibiting nesting building behavior near the cabin on June 11, but this behavior was not observed again. Agitated adult arctic terns were encountered during the brood surveys, and an adult was observed feeding a fledgling on July 12. Agitated adult terns were also encountered on the lower Porcupine River in June. A mew gull nest was observed on top of a beaver lodge at the Beaver Creek bear capture site on June 5.
See Sections G.1 and G. 7 for additional information on shorebird, gull, and tern observations.
6. Raptors
See Section G.2 for discussion of the survey work conducted with peregrine falcons. No other specific raptor work was conducted on the refuge.
A highly agitated hawk (Buteo sp.) was observed on the north end of the Arte Lake point count transect at Plot G during the surveys on June 19 and 29. Time was not taken to search for the nest.
7. Other Migratory Birds
Two types of bird surveys are conducted annually on the refuge which were designed for monitoring migratory songbirds: Breeding Bird Survey and Off-Road Point Counts. In addition, the demographics of a local population of songbirds are studied through mist netting and banding at Canvasback Lake. The surveys and the banding station are discussed in the following section.
Breeding Bird Survey
The Porcupine River Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) was surveyed during the early morning of June 15 using the standard methodology developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The 25-mile survey route begins near the confluence of the Black and Porcupine Rivers and ends roughly eight miles upstream efFort Yukon. Once again, low water levels slowed the pace of this year's survey and resulted in a decision to replace one survey point with another.
A total of705 individuals and 38 species, including 15 neotropical migrant songbird species, was observed during the survey (Table 11). The most frequently observed species was alder flycatcher (9% of the total). Other commonly observed species (observed at more than 25% of the survey points) included American wigeon, mew gull, Swainson's thrush, arctic tern, Table 11. Summary of 1996 Breeding Bird Survey, Porcupine River, Yukon Flats NWR. SPECIES I #BIRDS I %OF I #STOPS %TOTAL ALDER FLYCATCHER* 65 9 34 68
AMERICAN WIGEON 64 9 16 32
MEW GULL 63 9 13 26
SWAINSON'S THRUSH* 57 8 37 74
ARCTIC TERN 56 8 16 32
BANK SWALLOW* 52 7 4 8
YELLOW WARBLER* 42 6 24 48
SPOTTED SANDPIPER* 37 5 24 48
WHITE-CROWNED SPARROW* 34 5 26 52
AMERICAN ROBIN* 31 4 22 44
NORTHERN WATERTHRUSH* 23 3 21 42
ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER* 22 3 17 34
DARK-EYED JUNCO* 22 3 19 38
BUFFLEHEAD 20 3 5 10
FOX SPARROW* 18 2 18 36
COMMON SNIPE* 16 2 15 30
LESSER YELLOWLEGS* 11 2 10 20
COMMON RAVEN 7 1 4 8
SOLITARY SANDPIPER* 7 1 7 14
SEMIPALMATED PLOVER* 6 <1 6 12
NORTHERN SHOVELER 6 <1 1 2
RUBY-CROWNED KINGLET* 5 <1 5 10
GREEN-WINGED TEAL 5 <1 1 2
VARIED THRUSH 5 <1 5 10
CHIPPING SPARROW* 4 <1 4 8
GRAY JAY 4 <1 4 8
OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHER* 4 <1 4 8 COMMON REDPOLL 4 <1 3 6
YELLOW-RUMP ED WARBLER* 3 <1 3 6
RUSTY BLACKBIRD 3 <1 2 4
BALD EAGLE 2 <1 2 4
LESSER SCAUP 1 <1 1 2
BELTED KINGFISHER* 1 <1 1 2
NORTHERN FLICKER* 1 <1 1 2
BOREAL CHICKADEE 1 <1 1 2
SAVANNAH SPARROW* 1 <1 1 2
HAIRY WOODPECKER 1 <1 1 2
NORTHERN PINTAIL 1 <1 1 2 TOTAL I 705** I - I 50 -
• This species is a neotropical migrant with a significant portion of its winter range occurring south ofthe U.S./Mexico border. •• Total does not include 2 unidentified woodpeckers and 164 unidentified ducks which were recorded during the survey. 50 yellow warbler, spotted sandpiper, white-crowned sparrow, American robin, northern waterthrush, and dark-eyed junco. High numbers of bank swallows were also observed during the survey but at only four of the points; bank swallows are colonial nesters and have a patchy distribution. The twelve species mentioned above accounted for 77% of the observations recorded during the survey (excluding the unidentified ducks).
Off-Road Breeding Bird Point Count Surveys
Six Off-Road Breeding Bird Point Count transects, consisting of 12 points each, were surveyed during the 1996 field season using the methodology established by Alaska Partners in Flight (Handel 1994). Three of the transects are located at Marten Island on the Yukon River, while the other three transects are located at Plot G, an old waterfowl brood survey plot on the south side of Beaver Creek. Plot G is located within a potential oil and gas development area. The Marten Island transects were surveyed June 24-26; the Plot G transects were surveyed twice, first from June 17-19 and then on June 27-29.
Aerial view of the first portion of the Big Creek point count transect at Plot G (7 /96 Sowl).
A total of 351 individuals and 29 species, including 11 neotropical migrant songbird species, was recorded at the Marten Island points (Table 12). At Plot G, 457 individuals and 45 species were recorded during the initial survey period (Table 13), while 414 individuals and 37 species were recorded during the replicate surveys (Table 14 ); seventeen of the songbird species were neotropical migrants. 51
Table 12. Species composition and frequency on Marten Island off-road point count routes, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, June 24-26_!_ 1996.
ROUTE: WILLOW LONGLAKE PHALAROPE TOTAL STRINGER LAKE LAKE
SPECIES #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS
,....,,..,.... """';EO TEAL -- -- 1 1 1 1 1'111""1 "l-l~"ll.n - - 1 1 -- 1 1 SANDHILL CRANE* - - 6 3 __!_ 1 10 4 LESSER YELLOWLEGS* 4 4 1 1 2 2 .I 7 SOLITARY SANDPIPER* 3 3 5 5 5 4 13 12
rnuun I SNIPE* 6 5 2 2 2 2 10 9 RED-NECKED PI-Ill. I ll.RnPI= - -- - 6 2 6 2 MEW GULL - - 2 2 2 2 4 4 ARCTIC TERN - --- 4 3 4 3 GREAT GREY OWL -- 1 1 1 1 2 2 UNIUt:N 111-lt:LI WOODPECKER 2 2 1 1 1 1 4 4
ALDER Fl n.;A~LOHER· 2 2 6 5 5 4 13 11 GRAY JAY -- 1 1 1 1 2 2 BOREAL. CHirl<"nl=l= - 2 __g_ 4 SWAINSON'S THRUSH* 12 8 12 32 AMERICAN ROBIN* ..6 6 11 ..7 5 jlt 22 VAR lED THRUSH 4 4 6 6 1 1 11 11 ORANGE-CROWNED 6 4 •7 6 4 3 17 13 \A/1\QQI "<>*
YELLOW ••oo• ooo ~~~~ 7 2 _± 13 YELLOW-RUMPED W"RQI I=R* 10 6 10 Ill. 26 SAVANNAH SPARROW* 1- 7 6 J-1 1 3 3 11 10 FOX SPARROW* 4 4 5 5 5 5 14 14 LINCOLN'S SPARROW* 5 4 ---- 5 4 WHITE-CROWNED SPARROW* 1 1 -- -- 1
0 D. ' " "'YEO JUNCO* 5 3 8 7 ::==mmm::::t:K::::m::::::: 10 20 RUSTY BLACKBIRD - - 1 1 -- 1 1 PINE GP"""""'A 1 1 1 1 2 2 *4 4 WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL 2 1 -- - - 2 1 REDPOLLsp. -- 2 2 2 2 4 4
TOTAL NUMBER BIRDS' 1152 (18 species) 107 (23 species) 129' (24 species) 351 129 species)
* Neotropical migrant- significant portion of winter range is south of U.S.- Mexico border. 1 Numbers include flyovers. 2 Total includes two on;.l .. nHTo<>M "' 'and' total includes one ,.,., I duck. Table 13. Species composition and frequency on each point count route during the first surveys at Plot G near Beaver Creek, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, June 17-19 1996.
ROUTE: BIG CREEK BEARDEN ARTELAKE TOTAL 6/17/96 6/18/96 6/19/96
SPECIES #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS
BUTEO sp. - - - - 1 1 1 1 SANDHILL CRANE* - - - - 6 4 6 4 LESSERYELLOWLEGS* 3 3 7 6 10 7 20 16
SOLITARY~• 2 2 2 2 1 1 5 5
COMMON SNIPE* 5 5 10 8 7 7 22 20
MEW GULL 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 4 HAIRY WOOl 1 1 - - - - 1 1 NUKTHERN FLICKER* - - 1 1 -- 1 1 OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHER* 5 5 3 2 - - 8 7 •:::::::I:::::::~~::::-:::=:::::: ALDER FL' c;A L;Ht::K' - - 1 1 6 13 7 GRAY JAY 2 2 4 3 2 2 8 7 COMMON RAVEN -- -- 1 1 1 1 BOREAL CHICKADEE - - 2 2 2 2 4 4 RUBY-CROWNED KINGLET* 7 4 4 -- 12 11 GRAY-r.~~~K~nTHRUSH* - - 1 - 1 SWAINSON'S THRUSH* 12 l~ 12 8 ]1. 32 AMERICAN RQI3I~~ 6 4 J-10 9 21 19 VARIED THRUSH 3 3 j... 10 1 1 17 14 BOHEMIAN WAXWING - - 1 1 -- 1 1 ORANGE-CROWNt::U WARBLER* 1 1 -- 10 12 11 YELLOW V.O.RRI ~R* 2 -- 4 6 YELLOW-RUMPED WARBLER* ~- 11 11 8 lflil 30 BLACK POLL WARBLER* - - 1 1 - - 1 1
NUK I Ht::KN WAT':RTHKUSH* 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 CHIPPING SPARROW* - --- 1 1 1 1 SAVANNAH SPARROW* - - -- 7 4 7 4 FOX ~Pi\RROW* 1 1 6 6 5 5 12 12 LINCOLN <>D.O.RRnW* - - 1 1 1 1 2 2 WHITE-" 0 "..,~1ED SPARROW* - 4 2_ 1 1 3 DAI REDPOLLsp. ~ - - 1 1 - - 1 1 - TOTAL NUMBER INDIVInt 1.0. ~ -1362 (21 species) 146' (25 species) 174• (36 species) 457 (45 species) * Neotropical migrant- significant portion of winter range is south of U.S.- Mexico border. 1 Numbers include flyovers. 2 Total includes 2 green-winged teal, 3 American wigeon, 5 duck spp., 1 woodpecker sp., 1 possible northern flicker, and 1 passerine sp.; • total includes 4 pacific loons, 2 duck spp., and 2 woodpecker sp.; and • total includes 2 pacific loons, 1 common loon, 2 red-necked grebes, 5 greater white-fronted geese, 1 northern shoveler, 5 lesser scaup, 1 white-winged seater, 1 duck sp., 1 Bonaparte's qull, 3 arctic terns, and 1 · sp. 53 Table 14. Species composition and frequency on each point count route during the second surveys at Plot G near Beaver Creek, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. ROUTE: BIG CREEK BEARDEN ARTE LAKE TOTAL 6/28/96 6/27/96 6/29/96 SPECIES #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS #INDIV #PTS # tt-1_1)1\f #PTS CANADA GOOSE - - - - 1 6 1 LESSER SCAUP 2 1 - - 1 22 2 SANDHILL CRANE* - - - - •2 1 2 1 LESSER YEll nWI I=C::S* - - - - 8 7 8 7 SOLITARY SANDPIPER* 3 2 3 3 4 4 10 9 COMMON SNIPE* 4 2 2 2 3 3 9 7 Rl=n..IIJI=f'l 0 RL' " I KINGLET* 1 1 1 1 3 '"' 'IIIJSnN'S THRUSH" 11M 11 1-::::::::::::::m!I!:I::::::: 11 10 IIIBI 32 AMERICAN ROBIN* 7 3 8 28 18 VARIED THRUSH 11 9 11 •1 1 26 21 Rni-II=Milli\J WAXWING -1 1 - 1 1 2 2 - ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER* 2 2 •1 1 •::::::::=:=:=:::::::i:::::::::::::::::::: 7 12 10 YELLOW WARBLER* - - 3 3 YEL n~ _QIIMPI=n WARBLER* 12 11. jiRI 8 JJMI 31 N JK Mt:KN VVA -lRUSH" 1 1 2 2 - - 3 3 SAVANNAH SPARROW* - 8 5 8 5 - - - - - FOX SPAR~ 3 3 2 2 5 3 10 8 I 11\Jf'ni.N'SSPARROW* - - 2 2 - - 2 2 tVHI..-':0-vKUVVN<::U C:PllRRnW* - - 3 2 2 DARK-EYED JUNCO* 8 9 7 6 1111 23 PINE GROSBEAK 1 1 1 WHITE-WINGED - 8 - 8 2 2 J-- 18 REDPOLLsp. 1 1 1 1 3 3 5 5 -2 TOTAL NUMBER INDIVIDU~l.1l' 132 (23 species) -114' (18 species) 169• (30 species) 414 (37 species) * Neotropical migrant- significant portion of winter range is south of U.S.- Mexico border. 1 Numbers include flyovers. 'Total includes 1 red-throated loon, 1 pacific loon, 1 common loon, 2 woodpecker sp., and 1 passerine sp.; • total includes 1 pacific loon; and • total includes 2 red-necked grebes, 2 duck sp., 1 R.. 1 sparrow sp., and 1 n<>QQ,,.;nq sp. 54 At Marten Island, Swainson's thrush was the most frequently recorded species on the Willow Stringer Lake and Phalarope Lake survey routes, comprising 27% of the observations on each route (Figure 8). American robin was the most frequently detected species on the Long Lake· route, where it comprised 18% of the observations; Swainson' s thrush was the second most common species and accounted for 15% of the observations. The second most common species on the other two routes was yellow-rumped warbler (12% or 13% of the totals). Y ellow-rumped warblers came in third on Long Lake and made up 8% of the observations on the route. Yell ow warbler (8%) was the third most common species on Willow Stringer Lake, and dark-eyed junco (9%) was the third most common species on Phalarope Lake. Swainson's thrush was the most frequently recorded species on all six Plot G point count surveys, accounting for 12-24% of the observations on each survey (Figure 9). This species accounted for a smaller proportion of the birds recorded on the Arte Lake route, probably because this route had the greatest number of individuals and the highest species diversity of any of the transects. Y ellow-rumped warbler was the second most frequently encountered species during the Big Creek and Bear Den surveys, accounting for 14-17% of the observations on these surveys. Y ellow-rumped warblers tied alder flycatchers for second most common species on first Arte Lake survey but dropped to fifth place during the second replicate; alder flycatchers were third (after lesser scaup) during the second survey. Dark eyed juncos and white-winged crossbills were fairly common on the Big Creek and Bear Den surveys as well as the first Arte Lake survey, American robins were common on the Big Creek surveys and the second Arte Lake survey, varied thrushes were common on the Bear Den surveys, and orange-crowned warblers were common on the Arte Lake surveys. Two replicate sets of surveys were conducted at Plot G to determine if there would be a significant difference in the number of birds detected in middle and late June (Tables 13 and 14). There are differences between the initial and replicate surveys. Although the majority of the species recorded during the point counts were observed during both surveys, about 33% were observed during only one set of replicates. The non-passerine species tended to be the most variable in detectability. Four species ofpasserines were observed during the first set of surveys, but not during the second: gray-cheeked thrush, blackpoll warbler, chipping sparrow, and rusty blackbird. Total number of birds and number of species observed decreased during the second set of surveys. The timing of the second survey was after the peak singing period for most of the species. ~------~56 Figure 8. Common species recorded on the three off-road point count routes at Marten Island, 1996 Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge 15% 8% - --- 4% 43% 42% 7% 48% WlllowStr. Long Lake Phalarope SPECIES • SWTH D AMRO • YRWA D YWAR • DEJU • OTHER Figure 9. Common species recorded on the three off-road point count routes at Plot G during first and second surveys, 1996 Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge 15% 11% 40% Big Creek-1 BearDen-1 Arte Lake-1 17% 15% 25% 9% 14% Big Creek-2 BearDen-2 Arte Lake-2 SPECIES . SWTH . YRWA . WWCR 0 AMRO • DEJU O vATH • ALFL • OTHER . OCWA 56 M.A.P.S. Program A M.A.P.S. (Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship) station was established in 1995 on the west side of Canvasback Lake, approximately 33 miles southwest of Fort Yukon. The M.A.P.S. program was established by The Institute for Bird Populations and consists of a continent-wide array of mist netting and banding stations that are intended to collect long term data on population parameters of songbird species (DeSante et al. 1993). Twenty-five M.A.P.S. stations were operated by various agencies (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, National Biological Service, U.S. Forest Service, and Department of Defense) in Alaska during the summer of 1996. The Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station consists of ten mist nets and eight point count stations in an area of about thirteen acres. The station encompasses three habitat types: Open White Spruce Forest, Open Tall Willow Shrub Scrub, and Freshwater Pondweed-Bulrush (vegetation classification is according to Viereck et al. 1992). The mist nets were operated for six hours each sampling session on seven days between June 12 and August 10 for a total of 420 net hours (net hour= one mist net operated for one hour). Aerial view of the Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station (6/96 Sowl) 57 Table 15. 1996 Summary of captures at the Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station. #/100 SPECIES BAND RECAP RETRN RELES MORT TOTL NET HRS YELLOW WARBLER* 152 60 12 23 2 249 59 MYRTLE WARBLER* 521 4 2 1 1 60 14 SWAINSON'S THRUSH* 25 10 7 0 1 43 10 NORTHN WATERTHRUSH 28 8 2 0 0 38 9 AMERICAN ROBIN* 28 5 1 0 0 34 8 LINCOLN'S SPARROW 18 11 3 2 0 34 8 SAVANNAH SPARROW 22 1 0 0 0 23 6 GAMBELL'S WHITE- 15 3 0 1 0 19 5 CROWNED SPARROW CHIPPING SPARROW* 9 6 1 1 0 17 4 COMMON REDPOLL* 12 3 0 1 0 16 4 WESTRN WOOD-PEWEE* 13 2 1 0 0 16 4 SLATE-COLORED JUNCO 6 3 1 3 0 13 3 BOREAL CHICKADEE 8 2 1 1 1 13 3 AMER TREE SPARROW 9 1 1 0 0 11 3 RUSTY BLACKBIRD 9 0 0 1 0 10 2 ALDER FLYCATCHER 10 0 0 0 0 10 2 GRAY-CHEEKED THRUSH 5 3 1 0 0 9 2 FOX SPARROW 4 0 2 0 0 6 1 RUBY-CRND KINGLET 3 0 0 0 1 4 1 SOLITARY SANDPIPER 3 0 0 0 0 3 0.7 ORANGE-CRN WARBLER 2 0 0 0 1 3 0.7 GRAY JAY 2 1 0 0 0 3 0.7 BOHEMIAN WAXWING 2 0 0 0 0 2 0.5 WHITE-WING CROSSBILL 2 0 0 0 0 2 0.5 WILSON'S WARBLER 1 1 0 0 0 2 0.5 BLACKPOLL WARBLER 2 0 0 0 0 2 0.5 RED-WINGO BLACKBIRD 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.2 UNIDENTIFIED WARBLER 0 0 0 2 0 2 0.5 UNIDENTIFIED SPARROW 0 0 0 3 0 3 0.7 I TOTAL II 443 I 124 I 35 I 39 I 72 II 648 I 154 I * Nest(s) found at station for this species. 1 Three of these myrtle warblers were actually banded as nestlings. Even though they had bands when they were captured in the mist nets, they were not recaptures. 2 Two of the mortalities were recaptured individuals. 58 while 5% were returns from last year and 19% were this year's recaptures; the remaining 7% were not banded or were mortalities (Figure lOa). About 53% of the 443 individuals that were banded were hatch year birds (234) and 47% were after hatch year birds (206); three birds were of unknown age (Figure 1Ob ). One hundred and seventy-three of the banded birds were of known sex; slightly more males were banded than females (89 versus 84) (Figure lOc). The total captures included 124 recaptures, 76 of which were recaptured only once, but 20 individuals were recaptured multiple times. One male yellow warbler was captured a total of six times in the same net. Thirty-nine birds escaped or were released unbanded, while seven birds died. A total of 27 species was captured and banded at Canvasback Lake in 1996 (Table 15). Types of species captured at the station included flycatchers, jays, chickadees, kinglets, thrushes, waxwings, warblers, sparrows, blackbirds, and finches. The seven most common species banded at the station were yellow warbler, myrtle warbler (yellow-romped warbler), American robin, northern waterthrush, Swainson's thrush, savannah sparrow, and Lincoln's sparrow (Figure 11); together these species accounted for more than 70% of the banded birds. Yellow warblers were by far the most abundant species, accounting for 34% of the banded birds. Solitary sandpiper was the only non-passerine species captured in 1996. One new species was captured, red-winged blackbird, bringing the total number of species captured at the station up to 30. Juvenile red-winged blackbird captured at Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station (7/96 Heuer). 59 Figure 10. Birds captured at Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. Station, June 12-August 10, 1996. Recaptures- 124 (19%) Returns- 35 (5%) Releases - 39 (6%) -- Mortalities - 7 ( 1%) --- Banded- 443 (68%) a. Total captures HY- 234 (53%) AHY- 206 (47%) b. Age of banded birds Male - 89 (43% ..,_...- Unknown- 33 (16%) Female- 84 (41%) c. Sex of AHY birds Figure 11. Number of birds banded for each species at the Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. Station, June 12-August 10, 1996. MYWA- 52 (12%)-...... NOWA - 28 (6°/o ~-~ SWTH- 25 (6°/o) _ _, --OTHER- 118 (27°/o) SAVS- 22 (5%)- LISP - 18 (4°/o 0') 0 61 Figure 12. Age distribution of birds banded at the Canvasback lake M.A.P.S. Station in 1996, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. 120 108 ...... -AHY 100 -e- HY # 8 80 I R 60 D s 40 20 0 JUNE 12 JUNE 20 JULY3 JULY 13 JULY 23 AUG 1 AUG10 Sampling Date Figure 13. Total number of captures per 100 net hours during each sampling period at Canvasback M.A.P.S. station, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, June-August 1995 and 1996. 70 # 60 B 50 I 40 R D s 30 20 10 0 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 Sampling Period 62 A total of 105 birds were banded per 100 net hours at the M.A.P.S. station. The number of after hatch year (AHY) birds that were banded peaked on July 3 and decreased sharply by late July (Figure 12). The first hatch year (HY) individuals were captured on July 3. HY numbers increased significantly by July 13 and peaked dramatically on August 1. Captures of HY birds dropped dramatically by August 10; apparently, most of the birds had dispersed out of the area by this time. The total number of birds captured at Canvasback Lake in 1996 was considerably lower than in the previous year (648 versus 964). Capture rates were consistently lower than those in 1995 across most of the sampling sessions (Figure 13). The reasons for this decrease are unknown. Colored plastic leg bands were used to individually mark birds at the Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station for the first time in 1996. A unique combination of color bands was put on 69 adults from the following species: yellow warbler (26), American robin (16), western wood-pewee (7), myrtle (yellow-rumped) warbler (7), Lincoln's sparrow (5), slate-colored (dark-eyed) junco (4), common redpoll (2), Swainson's thrush (1), and chipping sparrow (1). A white band over the federal band on the right leg of each bird was used as the station identification color. Almost half of the color marked individuals were either recaptured in the mist nets or relocated at the station and 14 were associated with nests. A pair of yellow warblers, including a color banded male, in a mist net at the Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station (6/96 Bertram). 63 Color banding allows observers to recognize individual birds without having to capture them. Observations of color banded birds can be used to supplement recapture information for the M.A.P.S. program, providing additional information on survivorship. Repeated observations of color banded birds can be used to delineate the territories of these individuals and therefore learn more about their habitat preferences and nesting density. Color marking in association with nest monitoring can be used to learn something about nest site fidelity, mate fidelity, and individual productivity. Canvasback Lake is an ideal site for color marking birds, because nesting density is high and many of the birds are relatively easy to observe at the station. Nest Monitoring Efforts are made by the refuge staff to record at least some information on nests that are discovered while working on various field projects. Because the nesting density was high and banders tended to be very familiar with the area, a more formal effort was made to find and monitor nests at Canvasback Lake. Forty-nine nests were found at the M.A.P.S. station, including nineteen belonging to yellow warblers. A bicycle mirror mounted on the end of a 12-foot telescoping pole was used to look into nests that were above eye level in order to count eggs or chicks. Some nests were beyond the reach of the pole or were too well covered for any information to be collected. Vegetation structure at the nest site was also recorded for most of the nests. Information about the nests was recorded on nest cards. In addition to nest monitoring, 17 nestlings from five nests were banded (see Section G.16). Using a mirror on an extendable pole to examine a robin nest (7/96 Pomeroy). 64 The Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station would not have been a success without the help of numerous assistants. In addition to having two full time banders (Laura Pomeroy and Kristine Sowl), a number of people assisted in removing birds from mist nets including refuge staff (Mark Bertram, Fred Deines, Ted Heuer, and Mike Vivion), Isaac Solomon (RAPS student), Anna-Marie Barber and Liz Waggoner (Alaska Bird Observatory), and Loni Atthur, Ty Keltner, and Judy Williams (volunteers). Also thanks to Ellen and Fred Deines for allowing us to hold mist netting and banding training at their house during April when many redpolls are visiting their bird feeders. General observations of songbird breeding activity A number of songbird species exhibited signs of breeding activity on the refuge during the 1996 field season. Species for which nests were found included western wood-pewee, bank swallow, common raven, Swainson's thrush, American robin, orange-crowned warbler, yellow warbler, yellow-rumped warbler, chipping spanow, white-crowned spanow, dark eyed junco, rusty blackbird, and common redpoll. Recently fledged young were observed for western wood-pewee, boreal chickadee, Swainson's thrush, American robin, yellow warbler, yellow-rumped warbler, chipping spanow, fox spanow, red-winged blackbird, and rusty blackbird. Although neither nests nor recently fledged young were observed for alder flycatcher, olive-sided flycatcher, ruby-crowned kinglet, gray-cheeked thrush, varied thrush, blackpoll warbler, northern waterthrush, American tree sparrow, savannah sparrow, Lincoln's spanow, and white-winged crossbill, males were repeatedly heard singing. Also, one or more individuals of the following species were captured which had a well-developed brood patch or cloacal protuberance: gray-cheek thrush, bohemian waxwing, northern waterthrush, American tree spanow, Lincoln's spanow, and white-winged crossbill. Yellow warbler nest at Canvasback Lake (6/96 Deines). 65 8. Game Mammals Moose, caribou, black and grizzly bear, wolf, marten, beaver, wolverine, lynx, otter, red fox, and snowshoe hare are found throughout the refuge. Moose and black bear are the most commonly harvested game mammals. Marten are the most economically important furbearers. Moose Monitoring Moose are present throughout the refuge, their highest densities occurring along the Yukon and Porcupine rivers and in the foothills of the White Mountains. Their densities are low, however, compared to other areas of interior Alaska. Moose are an important subsistence resource for local residents and an important recreational resource for non-local Alaskans. Trend surveys have been conducted annually since 1983 to assess moose population trends and determine sex and age composition. Stratification flights were conducted on the eastern half of the refuge (GMU 25D East) in 1984 and 1989 and on the western half of the refuge (GMU 25D West) in 1983 and 1986 to determine a rough estimate of the moose population. A moose population estimation survey was completed on the western half of the refuge in 1992 and 1996 on the eastern half of the refuge in 1995. Population Estimation Survey In 1995 trend surveys were discontinued due to their inability to give reliable density estimates, to compensate for habitat changes over time, or to provide adequate sample size to calculate sex and age ratios and composition. Instead, a small scale population estimation survey, designed by Alaska Department ofFish and Game, was initiated to overcome these weaknesses. A population estimation survey was conducted November 1-3. The survey area included core hunting areas in the western portion of the refuge (Game Management Unit (GMU) 25D West) and was divided into the Stevens, Beaver, and Schwatka subunits. The population estimate for the core hunting areas in GMU 25D West was 666 moose with a certainty of+/- 21% at the 90% confidence level (Figure 14). The sightability correction 2 factor for this estimate was 0.05. The density estimate was 0.44 moose/mi . Estimated bull: cow, yearling bull: cow, and calf: cow ratios for the survey area were 54:100, 10:100, and 42:100, respectively. Proportions ofbulls, cows, and calves were 0.28, 0.51, and 00.21, respectively. 66 Figure 14. Estimated moose population by sam piing subunit in 1996. Western Yukon Flats 700 666 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 ---'------'-----'.LLUL.Lf-A'--L.... Stevens Beaver Schwatka Total Survey Area ~ D Cows 0] Bulls ~ Calves • Total Moose ~ A total of 666 moose was estimated in the western Yukon Flats survey area in 1996 (6/97 Pomeroy). 67 Comparisons were made between 1992 and 1996 moose surveys to evaluate population status, calf production, and yearling recruitment (see Tables 16 and 18). The 1,530.6 mi2 area surveyed in 1996 was extracted from the larger 4,500 mi2 1992 survey to make comparisons between years. Due to sampling differences between years, however, it was not possible to make comparisons between subunits between years. Population estimates were examined between years but these comparisons were made with caution due to the high variance associated with the 1992 estimate(+/- 0.33). Because the 1992 and 1996 population estimates overlap, it is possible that no significant population change has occurred. Population estimates and densities for 1992 and 1996 are given in Table 16. Further analysis will be done to compare population estimates. Table 16. Comparison of population estimate and variance, 1992 and 1996 moose population surveys, western Yukon Flats. Population Confidence Estimate Estimate Interval Range @ 90% level 1992 455 +\-33 304 f- 455-t 606 1996 666 +\-21 526 f- 666 ... 806 The following criteria were used to evaluate calf production, yearling recruitment, and sex ratios (Table 17). Table 17. Guidelines used to evaluate several population parameters. Excellent Good Normal Low Calf Production (calves/ I 00 cows) >50 40-50 30-40 20-30 Y rling Recruit. (yrl bulls/ I 00 cows) >15 10-15 5-10 <5 Sex Ratios (Bulls/ I 00 cows) 80-100 40-80 20-40 <20 Note: Guidelines differ from area to area dependent on moose and predator densities and habitat conditions. Calf production ranged from normal to good (31-44 calves/100 cows) in all subunits during 1996 (Figure 15). Overall calfproduction was good (42 calves/100 cows) and the proportion of calves has increased from 28 to 42 calves/1 00 cows since 1992 (Table 18). 68 Figure 15. 1996 Sex/Age Com position of Estimated Moose. Western Yukon Flats 120 119 100 80 60 54 46 44 40 20 0 --'---"-"'""'-'-+-'- Stevens Beaver Schwatka Total Area ~ Calves/1 00 Cows [[J] Yearling Bulls/100 Cows • Bulls/1 00 Cows Table 18. Comparison of estimated population moose statistics in 1992 and 1996, western Yukon Flats. Year 1996 1992 1992 Method Regression 1 Gasaway 2 Gasaway 3 (same area as 1996) Area size (m?) 1,500 mi2 1,500 mi2 4,500mi2 2 Area surveyed ( mi ) 365.5 476.18 1,008.8 No. units surveyed 27 37 76 Calves/ I 00 Cows 42 28 25 Bulls/1 00 Cows 54 53 71 Yrl.Bulls/100 Cows 10 9 12 Total Moose 666 455 619 Density/mi2 0.44 0.30 0.14 --CI@ 90% 0.21 0.33 0.21 1 - 1996, 1,530.6 mi2 area included the Stevens, Beaver, and Schwatka subunits,. 2 - 1992, 1,530.6 mi2 area included the Stevens, Beaver, and Schwatka subunits. 3 - 1992, 4,544.1 mi2 area included Game Management Unit 25D West. 69 Yearling recruitment was low in the Beaver subunit (3 yearling bulls/1 00 cows) and excellent in the Stevens and Schwatka subunits (range 17-23 yearling bulls/1 00 cows). Overall yearling recruitment was normal with 10 yearling bulls/1 00 cows. This ratio has increased slightly since 1992 (9 yearling bulls/100 cows). Bull/cow ratios were good to excellent in all subunits (range 42-119 bulls/1 00 cows). Proportions ofbulls and cows were similar in all but the Schwatka subunit. The Schwatka subunit had a much higher proportion of bulls and lower proportion of calves and cows. It is possible the early snow in October prompted migration of some moose out of the White Mountains and into the Yukon Flats. Overall the proportion of bulls to cows has remained constant since 1992. Moose density estimates in the Stevens, Beaver, and Schwatka subunits were 0.37, 0.72, and 2 2 0.22 moose/mi , respectively. The overall density for the 1,530.6 mi area was 0.44 moose/mi2 (CI +/- 0.21) (Table 18). The Stevens and Beaver subunits include a broad corridor (3-12 mile) on the north and south sides of the Yukon River. Habitats generally appear similar ·in both subunits and include primarily lowlands. It is unknown what factors cause such a wide disparity in density between the Stevens and Beaver subunits. The Schwatka subunit includes the White Mountains and it's bench lands, and the lowlands associated with Beaver Creek and Jefferson Creek. No moose were observed in over two thirds of the Schwatka subunits which accounts for it's overall low estimated moose density. The goal of this survey was to realize a precision of +I- 20% (90% CI) which we nearly achieved. Similar surveys conducted on the eastern Yukon Flats in 1995 achieved only +\- 0.33 (Bertram 1995). We feel our extra effort in stratification this year brought the variance down and we were satisfied with the results of the regression estimator sampling program (ADF&G, VerHoef, pers. comm.). The program is straight forward and user friendly. By dividing the 1,500 mi2 survey area into three subunits or essentially conducting three different surveys, we had the flexibility to terminate the survey and come away with density and sex and age composition information from some of the subunits. This would not have been possible with a stratified random sample of the entire survey area. This new method was advantageous over trend surveys because it provided a legitimate estimate of moose density, an adequate sample size for sex and age composition data, and it addresses annual variation of moose distribution. A partial estimate of cost is $11,370, however, this figure does not include overtime and per diem expenses. Thanks to observers Tom Seaton (ADF&G), Bob Stephenson (ADF&G), Volunteer Ernie Peter (Beaver) and Jim Akaran (YFNWR) for their contributions as observers in the back seat. Staff members Mark Bertram, Perry Grissom, and Paul Williams participated in the stratification and were piloted by Mike Vivion. Thanks also to pilots Marty Webb, Hollis Twitchell (NPS), and Stan Steck (NPS) for their safe expertise in the air. Special thanks to Dave Mills and Steve Martin (Superintendents, Gates of the Arctic and Denali National Parks) for allowing two staff pilots to assist in the survey. 70 We also wish to thank the Beaver Village Council for coordinating food and lodging accommodation, the Beaver Cruikshank school for providing lodging, and Beaver residents Theresa Winer and Glen Simon for preparing excellent meals. Black Bear Monitoring 1995 captures and movements Thirty-one bears were captured during 13 days of trapping in a 1.8 me capture area and included 21 initial captures and 10 recaptures. The 21 captured bears included three adult females (ages 5-14), 12 adult males (ages 5-19), one sub-adult female (age 3), and five sub adult males (ages 2-3). The capture period included 91 trap days with a capture rate of 4.3 trap days for new captured bears (with recaptures= 2.9 trap days per bear). Snares were tripped at bait sites 73% of the time. Nineteen bears were fitted with radio-collars and two yearling males were released. Collared bears were relocated 284 times and utilized an area approximately.1,945 mi2 (adaptive kernel@ 95% probability) between May and October. 2 2 2 Annual range for females varied from 7.7 mi to 325.5 mi (x = 87 mi ). Male annual ranges 2 2 2 were between 30.0 and 1,678 mi (x = 387 mi ). Bears denned in a 203 mi area, in close proximity to the capture area (minimum convex polygon method). 1996 den investigations Three dens occupied by females 512, 514, and 507 were investigated March 19-21. None of the females had cubs or showed any signs oflactation. Two of the three dens were excavated holes (similar to wolf dens) in the forest floor, the remaining den was excavated from a white spruce root system. Entrance hole heights varied from 10 to 12 inches and widths were between 17 and 21 inches. Chamber measurements were: heights 10 to 24 inches, widths 30-38 inches, and lengths 48-75 inches. Den volume 3 estimates ranged from 8. 7 to 25.3 ft . Den aspects were east, north, and northeast and settled snow depths were about 18 inches. The radio-collars (Telonics expandable break-away) on females 507 and 514 were in excellent condition. The collar on female 512 was partially deteriorated and the pleated expandable nylon was exposed. The two older adult females were outfitted with new T elonics collars with a modified canvas tab that will allow them to fall off when the cotton canvas tab rots through. The younger female was refitted with her original collar, which was repaired with electrical tape. Body weights were taken on only one female(# 512) which weighed 73 lbs, down from her spring 1995 weight of99lbs. 71 It is unknown at what stage these females are in their reproductive interval and what factors prevented successful pregnancies in winter 1996. However, it is surmised that the berry crop failure and the lack of thermal cover may have negatively influenced reproduction. 1996 captures Capture operations for black bear were conducted May 28 to June 9, 1996. Seven bears were captured in 12 days of trapping in a 1.5 mi2 area adjacent to Beaver Creek and near the villages of Beaver and Birch Creek. Five bears including three males (ages 6, 5, and 15) and two females (ages 13 and 14) were radio-collared. Two bears were recaptured six times and one bear was released without collaring. The capture period included 71 trap days, and a capture rate of 14.2 days for new captured bears (with recaptures= 5.9 trap days per bear). The rate of daily bear visits to bait sites was 54%. The highlight of the 1996 capture period was the recapture of adult male 515 who had shed his collar the previous April near his den site. He remained on the air through denning in October. Collared bears were monitored from April 26 to October 11 . Bear movements during 1996 are currently being analyzed. Black bear capture operations continued in 1996; this 13 year old female was recaptured three times in two days (6/96 Akaran). 72 Present status of radio-collared bears Ofthe 22 bears which were collared in 1995-1996, sixteen were transmitting strong signals by the end of the last tracking flight, October 11. Five collars have been documented as shed and were retrieved August 28-29. One collar was assumed shed and inaccessible in Beaver Creek .. Two additional collars were likely on mortality at the end of the tracking period, one of these bears may be an actual mortality. Bear den investigations are planned for March 1997 and capture operations targeting adult females is scheduled for May 1997. Age structure for all bears captured in 1995-1996 (n = 24) and harvested in 1996 (n = 10; teeth collected by local guide) are in shown in Figure 16. Figure 16. Age structure of black bears captured/harvested, Yukon Flats NWR- 1995-1996. 10 9 8 >-. 0 c 6 <1> ::::J 0'" .._<1> 4 u.. 3 2 0 I I I 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819 Age MALES n=27 FEMALES n=7 73 Adult females were visited in mid-March and all were without young. It's possible the poor berry crop and lack of thermal cover negatively effected reproduction (3/96 Vivian). Sheep Monitoring Dall sheep are found in the White Mountains on the southern boundary of the refuge. The majority of available sheep habitat is in the Steese National Conservation Area and the White Mountains National Recreation Area, which are managed by the Bureau of Land Management. However, sheep are also found on Mt. Schwatka which lies on the southern boundary of the refuge and includes a significant proportion of the population. Other off refuge areas in the region offering escape habitat include Mt. Prindle/Lime Creek, Victoria Mountain, and Cache Creek. The terrain is well traveled between these regions and telemetry data suggests the same population of sheep are utilizing many of these areas. 74 Sheep have been monitored intermittently since 1929, primarily by ADF&G. Since 1970 efforts have been made to census all sheep habitat aerially in the White Mountains region. Survey results suggest that the White Mountains sheep population may have decreased in the 1970's dependant on the consistency of survey effort over the years. Since 1991 sheep have been thriving with an estimated population of over 300 sheep. Since 1994 BLM, ADF&G, and USFWS have combined efforts to survey all available habitat in the White Mountains and sheep estimates have been over 400 since 1995. Refuge staff participated in a cooperative survey of the White Mountain region and completed surveys in the Mt. Schwatka and Victoria Mountain area on August 5. Flying conditions were good to excellent with little or no turbulence and excellent light. A total of 176 sheep, including 125 ewes, 40 lambs, and 11 rams were observed in both areas. A historical summary of sheep surveys of the White Mountains including the Schwatka!Victoria area are included in Table 19. Table 19. Historical summary of sheep surveys, White Mountains, 1970 to 1995. Victoria White Mt. Prindle Year Mt. Schwatka Mountain Mountains Lime Peak Total (USFWS) (USFWS) (ADF&G) (BLM) 1970 101 60 87 37 285 1977 (Aug) 56 27 2 23 124 1982 (May) 39 18 18 37 112 1982 (June) 74 6 17 35 132 1986 (June) 75 26 30 109 240 1989 (Aug) 77 no survey 36 124 237 1991 (Oct) 1291 no survey 70 157 354 1992 (Aug) 1182 see note 2 63 141 324 1994 (Aug) 70 32 66 176 344 1995 (Aug) 95 50 82 182 409 1996 (Aug) 129 47 84 204 464 1 incomplete survey 2 includes Victoria Mountain observations 10. Other Resident Wildlife Beaver cache surveys were conducted October 2-4 in the Beaver Creek, Big Creek, Old Lost Creek, Tulebagh Lake, and Sussaymin Lakes subunits. Continuous ground fog precluded 75 completion of other survey areas on the eastern Yukon Flats. The numbers of active lodges were down in all but the Beaver Creek subunit. The remaining subunits decreased 23-100 % in active lodges (Table 20). Table 20. Summary of observed beaver caches and lodges for Beaver Creek, Big Creek, and Old Lost Creek, Tulebagh Lake, and Sussaymin Lakes subunits, 1982-1996, Yukon Flats Refuge. SUBUNITNEAR TOTAL LODGES ACTIVE LODGES INACTIVE LODGES Beaver Creek 1982 24 5 19 1983 40 20 20 1984 52 30 22 1985 91 62 29 1987 109 53 56 1991 124 42 82 1995 75 42 33 1996 78 43 35 8 year mean 37.1 (+16%) Big Creek 1983 18 8 10 1984 34 13 21 1985 46 17 29 1987 49 13 36 1988 52 16 36 1991 59 19 40 1995 26 10 16 1996 25 4 21 8 year mean 12.5 (-68%) Old Lost Creek 1983 18 13 5 1984 30 19 11 1985 41 20 21 1987 56 26 30 1988 63 29 34 1991 90 28 62 Table 18. continued ... 76 Table 20. Summary of observed beaver caches and lodges for Beaver Creek, Big Creek, and Old Lost Creek, Tulebagh Lake, and Sussaymin Lakes subunits, 1982-1996, Yukon Flats Refuge. SUBUNIT/YEAR TOTAL LODGES ACTIVE LODGES INACTIVE LODGES 1995 53 20 33 1996 40 11 29 8 year mean 20.7 (-47%) Sussaymin Lakes 1983 9 7 2 1984 23 20 3 1985 35 18 17 1986 39 22 17 1987 52 23 29 1988 54 16 38 1991 61 26 35 1996 28 14 14 8 year mean 18.25 (-23%) Tulebagh Lake 1983 11 8 3 1984 18 15 3 1985 30 23 7 1986 40 26 14 1987 7 25 22 1991 66 23 43 1996 16 0 16 8 year mean 17.1 (-100%) 12. Wildlife Propagation and Stocking As reported in the last three annual narratives, the Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G) and the Service have been discussing the idea of reintroducing wood bison into the Yukon Flats. After considerable coordination with our Regional Office and the Fairbanks office of ADF&G, Refuge Manager Heuer and Fort Yukon Area Biologist Stephenson signed a joint letter that was mailed to all post office box holders residing in the Yukon Flats in June. The letter provided some basic information about wood bison and explained some of the steps 77 that would be necessary for a successful reintroduction. The letter suggested bringing together representatives ofNative village and regional corporations, local governments, and our agencies to discuss whether to reintroduce wood bison, and if so, how to proceed. The letter encouraged residents that had questions or comments about wood bison or who wanted to be involved in investigating and planning a possible reintroduction to contact ADF&G or the refuge at our toll free numbers. No calls were received, but there appears to be at least some moderate amount oflocal interest in a wood bison reintroduction. As a direct result of information presented to local villages by Craig Fleener (a college intern with ADF&G) and Sam Roberts from Fort Yukon, we did receive letters from five village councils stating that they were interested in working with us on this project and asking us to begin the environmental assessment process. As reported last year, there is still considerable reluctance on the part of some tribal governments to enter into a cooperative management effort with ADF&G and the Fish and Wildlife Service. It seems that due to the recent changes in Native American laws and policies2 and the uncertainty over "Indian Lands" in Alaska, local tribal groups are still trying to determine exactly what their options for self governance and management of natural resources are. They are reluctant to commit to anything that might lessen or compromise their future opportunities for "total control" over a wood bison reintroduction. The Service made it clear that the refuge's interest and involvement in the project is tied to enhancing the population of an endangered species and to increasing the biological diversity of the refuge (not in providing additional hunting opportunities). The Service has also taken the position that further discussions and/or decisions concerning the issue are not appropriate unless all interested parties are sitting at the table. 14. Scientific Collections Seven bird mortalities occurred at the refuge M.A.P.S. station (see Table 15, Section G.7). Individuals that were in good condition were saved and brought back to town to be given to the University of Alaska for museum specimens. Predators killed four ducks during waterfowl banding activities, and one duckling and two common snipe died after being captured in walk-in traps (see Section G.l6). None were saved for specimens because they were either in poor condition or would have spoiled before they could be flown into town. 2 For example, the 1994 amendments to the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act and the new Native American Policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 78 16. Marking and Banding Waterfowl banding efforts were continued on the Yukon Flats Refuge in cooperation with the Pacific Flyway program. Ducks were captured with rocket nets and walk-in traps at Dinosaur, Heart, and Tulebagh Lakes. All traps were baited with cracked com. A total of 605 ducks was captured, banded, and released between July 3 0 and August 15. Species captured and banded, in order of abundance, were American green-winged teal, northern pintail, mallard, and American wigeon (Table 21). The target species for this project were northern pintail and mallard. The refuge target quota for each species was 267 ducks (Female- 67 HY, 67 AHY; Male- 67 HY, 67 AHY) for a total of 534. The quota was met for hatch year (HY) and after hatch year (AHY) female pintails. The proportion of males to females was approximately 5:7, and the proportion ofHY to AHY ducks was approximately 3 :4. Only 11% of the total ducks banded this year were captured at Tulebagh Lake. Table 21. Sex and age composition of waterfowl banded on the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, July 30-August 15, 1996. Male Female Ratios SPECIES I I HY AHY UNK HY AHY UNK I TOTL I HY:AHY M:F NO PI 46 28 0 74 87 2 237 120:115 74:163 AGWT 51 91 0 80 89 9 320 131:180 142:178 MALL 0 23 1 0 6 1 31 0:29 24:7 AM WI 1 10 0 0 6 0 17 1:16 11:6 I TOTAL II 98 I 152 I 1 II 154 I 188 I 12 II 605 II 252:340 I 251:354 I NOPI = Northern Pintail, AGWT =American Green-winged Teal, MALL= Mallard, AMWI= American Wigeon, HY =Hatch Year, AHY =After Hatch Year, UNK =Unknown, M =Male, F =Female Captured ducks included sixteen previously banded birds--ten northern pintail and six green winged teal. All16 recaptures were banded on Yukon Flats Refuge between 1991 and 1995. Duck mortality associated with capture and handling was extremely low. One duckling died after capture in a walk-in trap. Additionally, one pintail and one green-winged teal were killed by a wolf at Heart Lake, a mink killed a mallard at Tulebagh Lake, and an unidentified raptor killed a green-winged teal at the Heart Lake bait site. 79 Mallards in walk-in traps at Tulebagh Lake (8/96 Bertram). Removing ducks from rocket net at Heart Lake (8/96 Sowl). 80 Banding Summary 1991-1996 Between 1991 and 1996, 5,335 ducks have been banded on the Yukon Flats Refuge. Species captured and banded, in order of abundance, were northern pintail (2,587), American green winged teal (2,474), mallard (189), American wigeon (76), northern shoveler (5), canvasback (3), and redhead (1) (Figure 17). A banded northern pintail (8/96 Pomeroy). Waterfowl have been banded at the Mallard Lake site, including Heart and Dinosaur Lakes, since 1991. The greatest number of ducks were banded at this site in 1994 and 1995 (both total ducks and ducks per unit effort) (Figure 18). The number of ducks banded in 1996 was the lowest number banded per unit effort in all six years of banding. Fewer hatch year ducks were banded than after hatch year ducks (Figure 19); 1992 was the only other year that fewer HY individuals were banded than AHY birds. Either the young ducks had not gathered at the banding sites during our usual capture period or local productivity was lower in 1996. Band Recovery One hundred and twenty-five bands have been recovered from the 4,374 ducks banded on the Yukon Flats between 1992 and 1996, a return rate of almost 3%. Bands have been recovered in 21 different states, three Canadian provinces, and Mexico (Figure 20). Figure 17. Waterfowl banded by species Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, 1991-1996. 2800 2400 • Northern Pintail • Green-winged Teal # • Mallard 2000 • American .· ...... "' "''---~' D u 1600 c K 1200 s 800 400 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 TOTAL YEAR -00 82 Figure 18. Number of ducks banded at Mallard Lake, 1991-1996, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. 1100 .....,._ Total # ducks banded 1000 --..- Avg # ducks/1 0 days # 900 D 800 u c 700 K s 600 500 400 300 1991 1993 1994 1995 1996 YEAR Figure 19. Age classification of waterfowl banded at Mallard Lake, 1991-1996, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. 800 786 D HY 700 • AHY f----+-----t-i 600 0 UNK # 500 D u c 400 K 300 s 200 100 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 YEAR Figure 20. Recovery locations of banded waterfowl, 1992-1996, Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. Oregon6----. --- Washington 9 ~- Alberta 10 California 33 - ...... Saskatchewan 3 British Columbia 4 :.--1---- Alaska 3 Arkansas 8 --- Texas 8 83 84 Other Banding Nearly 500 landbirds and shorebirds were banded on the refuge this summer. Most of these (89%) were captured in mist nets at the Canvasback Lake M.A.P.S. station (see Section G.7). A summary of the 443 birds and 27 species captured at the M.A.P.S. station is given in Table . 15. In addition, six yellow warbler, six chipping sparrow, and five myrtle warbler nestlings were banded at Canvasback Lake. The remainder of the birds (40 birds of 11 species) were captured incidental to duck banding operations at the Tulebagh and Mallard Lake sites (Table 22). Half of these birds were inadvertently captured in either the rocket nets or walk-in traps used to capture waterfowl, while the other half were captured in mist nets. Unlike last year when more than 14 7 rusty blackbirds were captured, only 15 were captured this year. Table 22. Summary of incidentallandbird and shorebird banding results on Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, July 30- August 12, 1996. 1 2 I SPECIES II SITE I METHOD I BAND I RELEASE II TOTAL I Common Snipe Tulebagh, Duck trap 6 2 83 Dinosaur Lesser Yellowlegs Tulebagh Duck trap 2 -- 2 Solitary Sandpiper Dinosaur Duck trap 1 -- 1 Ruby-crowned Kinglet Mallard Mist net 1 -- 1 Swainson's Thrush Mallard Mist net 2 - 2 Orange-crowned Warbler Mallard Mist net 2 -- 2 Myrtle Warbler Mallard Mist net 7 - 7 Savannah Sparrow Mallard Mist net 3 -- 3 Lincoln's Sparrow Mallard Mist net 3 -- 3 Slate-colored Junco Mallard Mist net 2 -- 2 Rusty Blackbird Tulebagh, Duck trap, 11 4 15 Heart Rocket net I TOTAL II I I 40 I 6 II 46 I 1 Mist nets were operated for 25.5 net hours. 2 Birds were released because they were injured or bands were not available. 3 Total does not include two snipe that died in walk-in traps. 85 H. PUBLIC USE 1. General Most public contacts by refuge personnel are with residents of the villages within and adjacent to the refuge. Visits to these communities serve to keep residents informed and consequently increase understanding and cooperation. Good rapport and cooperation with Yukon Flats villages is essential since the majority of refuge uses involve hunting, fishing, trapping, food gathering and other subsistence activities oflocal village residents. The refuge is regularly represented at meetings of the Yukon Flats Fish and Game Advisory Committee, the Eastern Interior Regional Subsistence Advisory Council, and the Fort Yukon and the Fairbanks Sub-Regional Offices of the Tanana Chiefs Conference. These meetings are an opportune time to inform village residents and the general public of ongoing and future refuge programs. Additionally, refuge personnel learn about village concerns. The refuge enhanced its ability to involve local residents with refuge issues with the first mailing of the Yukon Flats NWR Information Bulletin in August of 1995. This is a short summary of particularly important refuge issues that is sent via bulk mail to all postal box holders in seven villages. For a little over one hundred dollars per mailing, we potentially reach our entire local constituency. The importance of specific issues dictates our mailing schedule. We are now up to Information Bulletin number three. Only one bulletin went out in 1996, an August issue which covered the following topics: waterfowl banding, the thirteen fires which burned 160,000 acres of refuge lands, the change in refuge-assigned aircraft, and the upcoming hunting season. We routinely participate in such annual events as Career Day, National Hunting and Fishing Day, National Wildlife Week, International Migratory Bird Day, Creamer's Field 5th Grade Birdwatch, BLM Outdoor Days, Earth Quest Camp, Tanana Valley Fair, and National Wildlife Refuge Week. These efforts are shared with other Service offices in Fairbanks. During April, National Wildlife Week information packages and flyers on Alaska Wildlife Week were distributed to all villages on or near the refuge. The following are some of the meetings attended by refuge staff SC/ROS James attended a meeting of the Yukon Flats Fish and Game Advisory Committee in Fort Yukon in January. DRM Deines and SC James also attended a meeting Dall River Working Group in January. RM Heuer, DRM Deines, FMO Grissom attend the Northern Ecoregion Fire Management Meeting in February. In March, RM Heuer attended the Yukon Flats Wood Bison Reintroduction Committee meeting in Fort Yukon, and RM Heuer and SC James also attended the Eastern Interior Regional Subsistence Council meeting in Fort Yukon. In April, RM Heuer attended the Federal Subsistence Board Meeting in Anchorage, and a similar set of meetings in May. Ri\1 Heuer met with three Russians and discussed wildlife law enforcement issues. In October, RM Heuer and SC James attended the fall meeting of the Eastern Interior 86 Federal Subsistence Advisory Council in Fairbanks. In addition, SC James and Arctic RM Kurth attended the North Slope Federal Subsistence meeting in Anchorage. FMO Grissom traveled to Aniak to the Western Interior Regional Subsistence meeting. On November 7th, RM Heuer met with the Governor's Dalton Highway Advisory and Planning Board in Stevens Village. RM Heuer also attended the Northern Ecoregion Project Leaders Meeting in November. SC McClellan and FMO Grissom attended a village meeting in Allakaket. 2. Outdoor Classrooms-Students As in past years, the Yukon Flats staff presented numerous environmental education programs in both the local Fairbanks schools, and in the Yukon Flats schools. Some of the topics covered included fire ecology and management, habitat use, bird migration, caribou anatomy, black bears, and the state and federal wildlife refuge system. WB Bertram dissects a caribou eyeball for a group of 5th and 6th graders at Joy Elementary School in Fairbanks (2/96 unknown). National Wildlife Week--Refuge staff were active again during National Wildlife Week, conducting classroom visits to all but one of the schools on the Yukon Flats. This year, we offered programs on wetlands and fisheries. These programs included 230 children. Laurel Devaney of the Fairbanks Fisheries Resource Office again assisted us in this effort. 87 Creamers Field Migratory Waterfowl Refuge Y" Grade Bird Watch--DRM Deines organized the recruitment list of biologists to assist with this event. Volunteers were recruited from all Service offices in Fairbanks. Yukon Flats staff had 100% participation. Volunteers helped present a variety of programs, including how to use binoculars, bird behavior, and how to operate a spotting scope, to the students. All of the 5th grade classes from the Fairbanks North Star Borough school system participated in this event during the week of April22nd. Over 600 students enjoyed this field trip event to the local State Refuge across town. Twin Bears Camp--FMO Grissom helped out at the Twin Bears outdoor education camp in the Chena River Recreation Area during May. He presented a program on animal morphology and ecology to 60 5th grade students using a variety of animal skulls. BLM Outdoor Days--Refuge staff again pitched in and helped with this annual spring event. It is put on for all of the 6th grade classes in the Fairbanks North Star Borough School District. It was held May 14-16 in the woods on the ski trail system at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Yukon Flats staff manned the radio telemetry and fire ecology stations this year. Approximately 600 students participated in this year's event. Unlike last year when it snowed, the weather cooperated this year and was really pretty nice. Earth Quest Camp--Refuge staff again assisted in both planning and conducting the Earth Quest Camp, a residential environmental education summer program for students from all over northern and western Alaska which allows hands-on exploration in the Natural Sciences. This year, 24 rural high school students attended the camp for 12 days. Topics for exploration included fire, wildlife, cultural and historical resources, mining, and fisheries. FWB Akaran was the primary station representative on this project, while FMO Grissom prepared the lesson plan for the fire and forestry unit. The fire unit included learning about fire effects and monitoring, as well as an exercise for writing a fire management plan. The second year of the camp was deemed to be a success. 6. Interpretive Exhibits/Demonstrations Kiosk at Yukon River Bridge-- The refuge received $3,000 in fiscal year 1994 for a challenge grant cost share project with the Stevens Village Council. The project was to develop and install a land-status map and interpretive sign at the boat launch facility near the Yukon River bridge. Considerable time was spent working with Stevens Village representatives and the Bureau ofLand Management (land managers of the site location) to decide on the exact sign language. Alyeska Pipeline Service Company agreed to assist with the project by fabricating the interpretive sign and erecting the kiosk once the other cooperators had prepared the land status map, designed the display, and agreed upon the interpretive message. At the end of 1996, the refuge received word that the sign had been erected. 88 Interpretive Exhibit along Dalton Highway-- During 1995, the refuge received two copies of three interpretative panels designed for an exhibit that will be constructed at the Yukon Flats overlook on the Dalton Highway. The signs were designed through a cooperative effort of the refuge staff, Arctic NWR staff, and the Bureau ofLand Management. The interpretive panels show the location and immensity of the refuge, describe the importance ofthe Yukon . Flats to waterfowl, and discuss the role of fire in maintaining the natural diversity ofthe area. The interpretive panels were manufactured by Wilderness Graphics. The Bureau of Land Management has agreed to fabricate and erect the exhibit for us, all we need to do is supply the materials needed for constructing the observation platform and frames and supports for the interpretive panels. Unfortunately, we have been unable to complete this project, but hope to in the near future. 7. Other Interpretive Programs International Migratory Bird Day--Several staff members helped plan and conduct a very successful International Migratory Bird Day on May 11 at the Noel Wein public library. DRM Deines presented the awards for the Junior Duck Stamp contest. DRM Deines and BT Sowl prepared a great display of bird nests using seven nests collected from around Canvasback Lake last summer and photographs ofbirds and nests from all three Fairbanks refuges. RM Heuer and DRM Deines did their 'Tool Time" act and built several nest boxes, a chickadee roosting box, and a deluxe bird feeder for other displays. WB Bertram gave a slide show on waterfowl identification and demonstrated available waterfowl identification software, while BT Sowl presented a slide show on songbird banding basics. National Wildlife Refuge Week-- Fairbanks, Alaska has a unique relationship with the National Wildlife Refuge System. Since the Arctic, Kanuti, and Yukon Flats Refuges are all headquartered in Fairbanks, Fairbanks has the distinction of being the administrative seat to more NWRS lands (about 30 million acres) than any other city. To us, it seemed only natural that the NWR Week celebration in Fairbanks should be one of the best and biggest. A number of excellent events were held in Fairbanks during NWR Week. A "Refuge Discovery Day" was held at the Alaska Public Lands Information Center. At that event young people had fun learning about the NWRS by participating in refuge and wildlife related educational activities. Kids and their parents were also entertained by slide shows about the three Fairbanks refuges. An exhibit about the NWRS (highlighting the Arctic, Kanuti, and Yukon Flats NWRs) was jointly developed by the three refuge staffs and prominently displayed at the entrance to the Fairbanks public library during the entire month of October. There was radio and television coverage of several events, including a 1-hour radio call-in show during which the three refuge managers responded to (mostly amiable) questions. We even designed a 40-foot banner announcing the NWR Week celebration which hung across the Cushman Street Bridge for two weeks. 89 NWRW banner across the Cushman Street Bridge in Fairbanks (10/96 Heuer). But the crowning event was definitely our weekend celebration at the Bentley Mall, Fairbanks' busiest shopping mall. During this 2-day event, an estimated 6,000 people were directly contacted. A 3-hour live radio broadcast from the mall, during which nine employees were interviewed including Regional Director David Allen and Geographic Assistant Regional Director Dick Pospahala, reached about 10,000 additional residents. At the mall, we had hands-on activities for young people including a refuge/wildlife beanbag toss, a very popular station where kids could create "window bird art," and another popular activity where young (and old alike) could "create a refuge." There were opportunities to prepare Junior Duck Stamp entries, to conduct wildlife surveys via computer, to examine interactive refuge and wildlife displays, and to have your face painted as your favorite refuge animal. We distributed over 1,200 refuge educational messages (cleverly disguised as helium balloons). Several employees took shifts in bear and moose costumes to hand out the balloons, and one employee (whose name can't be mentioned because he subsequently entered the clown protection program) dressed as "Nickels." Chuck Fulleton from Region 7's External Affairs Office did an outstanding job portraying founding father Theodore Roosevelt. And, for the older, more inhibited folks who were not exceptionally enthralled about talking to bears, moose, and clowns, there was a booth where uniformed employees supplied all sorts of information about the NWRS including NWR Week posters and bumper stickers encouraging people to "Celebrate Wildlife by Supporting Your National Wildlife Refuges." There was also a very popular station supplying free (but not fat free) Blue Goose Cake. 90 Bean bag toss game at the Bentley Mall during NWRW (10/96 Heuer). Bentley Mall Today NWRW ambassadors on their way to the Bentley Mall (10/96 Bertram). 91 Although Fairbanksans are not widely recognized for their love and admiration of the Federal Government, grassroots support of the refuge system was demonstrated by the fact that more than 150 people signed up for a volunteer opportunity on one of the three refuges. This year's effort required a lot of planning and coordination among the three offices, but the results surpassed our wildest expectations - besides, it was a lot of fun! NWR Week gives us an excellent opportunity to reach out and develop a stronger relationship with local communities. We think that the main reason that NWR Week was so successful, not only in Fairbanks but nationwide, is that it gave refuge field employees (the people who are proudest of and have the biggest investment in the NWRS) an excuse to tell the public about our wonderful National Wildlife Refuge System. In Fairbanks, we're already looking forward to next year! 8. Hunting The Federal takeover of subsistence management on federal public lands ( 60% of all Alaskan lands) in July i990 resulted in major changes in hunting in Alaska. Separate federal and state hunting regulations are promulgated annually for big and small game, furbearers, and game birds. The checkerboard pattern of federal, state and private lands and the concurrent checkerboard regulatory patterns makes hunting a confusing matter to both managers and users. Moose hunting regulations serve as a good example. The refuge boundaries cut across three state Game Management Unit (GMU) subunits, 25(A), 25(B), and 25(D). Subunit 25(D) is split into east and west, effectively creating four units. Both federal and state regulations govern moose hunting in these units. Furthermore, the federal and state regulations within each of the four units are different. These include a Federal Permit hunt on federal lands and a State Tier II Permit hunt on private/state lands in 25(D) West, and a general season for each of the other three units, although each has a different open season. Practically speaking, however, the majority of hunting within the refuge boundaries takes place in 25(D) West and East, which are the focus of this report. The general sport season is opened to all recreational and subsistence hunters and applies to Game Management Subunits 25A, 25B, and 25(D) East. The people eligible for the federal subsistence hunts in the four subunits ofGMU 25 within Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge vary for each subunit. Subunit 25A is open only to rural residents of subunit 25A and subunit 25D. Subunit 25B is open to all qualified rural Alaskan residents. Subunit 25(D) West is open only to residents ofBeaver, Birch Creek and Stevens Village. Subunit 25(D) East is open to all rural residents of subunit 25(D) East. The State of Alaska's Tier II hunt applies to state and private lands (e.g., Corporation lands and navigable waters) within 25(D) West. The State's Tier II hunt attempts to allocate hunting opportunities based on customary and direct dependence upon game as the mainstay of one's livelihood, local residency, and availability of alternative resources. Confusion exists among many users as to which hunt 92 pertains to them and which permits they need. As a result, some residents hunt without any permits and/ or do not report the game they harvest. Return of permit reports by rural residents is generally low, and there is no satisfactory way of following up with these users about their hunting success. Subsistence users are afraid that state hunts and recreational hunters could conflict with the subsistence priority mandated by ANILCA. In response, many Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) corporations have closed their lands to non-shareholders. Other private landowners have followed the lead of the ANCSA corporations. Private lands within Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge are theoretically closed to non-local residents without permission. Refuge land remains open to the public, except non-local residents cannot hunt moose on refuge land in GMU 25 (D) West. In addition, boundaries on maps are difficult to translate to boundaries on the ground, so confusion exists among all parties. The Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G) no longer publishes the annual Alaska Wildlife Harvest Summary. Therefore, harvest data for this report is based on preliminary analysis of the returns of harvest tickets, permit reports by hunters and harvest information from the Council of Athabascan Tribal Governments (CATG). Given the low rate ofharvest reporting by rural residents, the harvest data reflect less than the actual harvest. Moose Hunting Moose are the most important big game mammal taken in Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. Moose harvest data for the 1995-1996 season is shown in Table 23, and partial data for the 1996-1997 season is in Table 24. The Federal Subsistence Board established a quota of30 bull moose for GMU 25(D) West beginning with the 1993-1994 season. The 30 bulls were allocated among the three villages based on population. The number of permits allocated to each village was as follows: Village Number ofPermits Beaver 13 Birch Creek 5 Stevens Village 12 TOTAL 30 For the 1995-1996 season, permits were given to the respective village councils and they issued the permits to individual hunters. We only received two harvest reports back (one successful and one unsuccessful) and do not have any records or know the identity for the other 28 individuals issued a permit. For the 1996-1997 season, refuge staff issued the permits to individual hunters. By doing this, we were able to ensure that the identity of all 30 hunters would be put into the database; after the season was over, we mailed reminder letters 93 to the hunters who had not returned their harvest reports. For the 1996-1997 season, we have already received six harvest reports back (two unsuccessful and four successful--see Table 24). Also initiated during the 1993-94 regulatory year was a subsistence harvest monitoring program administered by CATG under a cooperative agreement with the Federal Subsistence Management Office. This contract was in force through the end of 1995. CATG employees conducted household interviews bimonthly in ten villages in and around the refuge to collect harvest data on all subsistence use species including moose. The CATG data augments ADF&G harvest report data for GMU 25(D) East, 25(A), and 25(B). Therefore, three moose harvest reporting systems were in place beginning with the 1993-94 season. Table 23. Reported moose harvest in GMU 25(0), 1995-96. Hunt Title Number Moose/Community Taken 25(0) West - Federal Permit Hunt RM945 1 Moose 1 Birch Creek 25(0) West - State Tier II Hunt 16 Moose 7 Beaver 2 Fort Yukon 3 Fairbanks 1 Nenana 1 North Pole 2 Stevens Village 25(0) West- TOTAL 17 Moose 25(0) West - CA TG Harvest Report Not Beaver Contract (includes moose taken under Available Federal and State harvest regulations) Birch Creek Stevens Villaae 25(0) East - State Harvest Report 23 Moose Uknown 25(0) East- TOTAL 23 Moose As of April19, 1997, based on harvest monitoring by CATG, ADF&G, and the Federal Office of Subsistence Management, the 1996-1997 preliminary reported moose harvest for Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge is shown in Table 23. 94 Table 24. Preliminary reported moose harvest for GMU 25(0), 1996- April 19, 1997. Hunt Title Number Moose/Community Taken 25(0) West - Federal Permit Hunt RM945 9 Moose 5 Stevens Village 2 Birch Creek 2 Beaver 25(0) West - State Tier II Hunt 6 Moose 3 Beaver 1 Birch Creek 1 North Pole 1 Stevens Village 25(0) West- TOTAL 15 Moose 25(0) West - CATG Harvest Report Not Unknown Contract (includes moose taken under Available Federal and State harvest regulations) Bear Hunting Black bears are abundant on the Flats and are taken by some local residents for food. They are also hunted to some extent by non-local residents and nonresidents for trophy value and/or food. The State of Alaska does not require black bear hides from the Flats area to be sealed, so in effect there is no harvest reporting system in place for black bears. Commercial guides are, however, required to report harvests. Guide reports for the Yukon Flats indicate that guided hunters took 10 black bears (9 males and 1 female) during the 1995-1996 season. Grizzly bears are not as abundant on the Flats as black bears. Harvested grizzlies must be sealed. The reported 1995-1996 harvest was two males. One of the grizzlies was harvested by a visitor from Switzerland who was working with one of the refuge permitted commercial guides. Local compliance with grizzly-sealing requirements is typically low. Therefore, the actual harvest of grizzlies is also believed to be higher than the reported figure. Caribou Hunting Two caribou herds use portions of the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. The Porcupine herd ranges from the Arctic Coastal Plain on Arctic NWR, across the eastern and northern portion of Yukon Flats NWR, and into the Yukon Territory of Canada. Subsistence hunters, primarily from Kaktovik, Arctic Village, Fort Yukon, Venetie, Beaver, and Chalkyitsik, 95 account for most of the harvest ofthe Porcupine herd. These hunters took an estimated 250 animals in 1994-1995. Sport hunters harvested an additional 75 Porcupine caribou (72 bulls and 3 cows) on Arctic and Yukon Flats Refuges during the 1994-1995 season. The White Mountain herd, probably an offshoot from the Fortymile herd, is a relatively sedentary herd centered in the White Mountains which straddle the border between Yukon Flats Refuge and · BLM's White Mountains National Recreation Area. Hunters harvested 19 bulls and 2 cows from the White Mountain herd during the 1994-1995 season. 9. Fishing Subsistence Fishing A variety of fish species are used by local residents during their seasonal subsistence activities. Although some species of fish are available throughout the year, most fishing takes place during the summer months. Fish are the most important subsistence resource to villagers in and around Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, comprising up to 90 percent of the total subsistence harvest by weight. Fish are shared with other households in the community and with people in other areas, including Fairbanks, Anchorage, and out-of-state. Contemporary fishing techniques consist offishwheels (tr'il in Gwich'in3 or Jookk'a okko inKoyukon), set gill nets (chihvyaa or taabeef), and hooking (jalor gilt!). A few older residents know how to make and use fish weirs and basket traps (neegwaatsaii or taal'ona), but rarely do so. Some whitefish and pike are taken with fish spears (ch'eedaih or badeegguda). Salmon are the most important fish resource to residents of Yukon River villages, and four separate salmon runs are fished: chinook, summer chum, fall chum, and coho. Chum salmon make up somewhere between 50 and 75 percent of the normal catch. Tables 25 through 29 present the subsistence harvest from 1979 through 1995 (most recent harvest data) for Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge villages. These data, collected by Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G), show large yearly variations in the salmon harvest. Harvests depend on a variety of factors including: the fish run, number of people available in a family to fish, availability of boats and equipment, number of dogs owned, and other employment opportunities. Fishing is a cooperative effort usually with men needed to do the fishing and women required to process the catch. In 1995, the following number of households fished in each village: Stevens Village- 20, Birch Creek- 2, Beaver- 10, Fort Yukon- 52, Circle- 9 and Chalkyitsik- 6. 3Gwich'in refers to the language and cultural group of the people who reside in Fort Yukon, Beaver (in part), Birch Creek, Circle, and up the Porcupine River into Canada. Koyukon refers to language and cultural group of the Native residents of Stevens Village and downriver to Kaltag as well as up the Koyukuk River. Much intermarriage and relocation has occurred between villages and Koyukon is often spoken in Gwich'in villages and vice-versa as well as other languages. 96 Table 25. Subsistence catch 1 of chinook salmon by villages on or near the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, 1979-1995. Stevens Birch Fort Year Village Creek Beaver Yukon Circle Chalkyitsik 1979 2,194 - 394 1,922 1,175 - 1980 3,962 - 506 2,527 769 - 1981 2,387 - 552 2,794 728 - 1982 3,745 - 250 1,894 969 - 1983 5,203 - 220 1,887 648 - 1984 4,676 - 553 3,608 545 - 1985 4,628 - 506 2,900 2,259 - 1986 4,601 - 708 3,083 2,219 0 1987 2,076 - 466 3,950 1,614 0 1988 2,845 0 940 2,245 1,125 0 1989 3,101 0 1,694 4,898 322 0 1990 1,295 - 721 4,051 1,951 0 1991 2,035 196 713 5,585 1,871 0 1992 1,887 44 1,564 4,122 1,752 3 1993 1,754 0 1,557 6,361 745 0 1994 2,814 119 850 4,727 1,377 0 1995 2,674 93 1,221 3,132 1,145 0 0 =No harvest -=Village not surveyed 1 Catches in numbers of fish. Includes catches by Fairbanks subsistence and personal use permit holders that fished in Yukon River near bridge crossing. Source: Keith Schultz, ADF&G, pers. comm. 97 Table 26. Summer, fall and total subsistence chum catch 1 by Stevens Village and Beaver, 1981-95. Stevens Village Beaver Summer Fall Total Summer Fall Total Year Chum Chum Chum Chum Chum Chum 1981 2,576 8,356 10,932 146 735 881 1982 666 7,392 8,058 534 1,878 2,412 1983 5,051 3,502 8,553 100 6,004 6,104 1984 5,952 4,932 10,884 167 0 167 1985 3,046 11,679 14,725 263 1,761 2,024 1986 3,116 4,150 7,266 0 3,321 3,321 1987 1,446 7,538 8,984 657 5,750 6,407 1988 865 1,451 2,316 214 96 310 1989 2,375 6,633 9,008 124 7,242 7,366 1990 1,671 3,857 5,528 108 757 865 1991 1,385 2,481 3,866 2,355 7 2,362 1992 460 150 610 12 361 373 1993 653 862 1515 134 692 826 1994 459 45 504 655 2,069 2,724 1995 158 3,194 3,352 36 1,231 1,267 0 =No harvest -=Village not surveyed 1 Catches in numbers of fish. Source: Keith Schultz, ADF&G, pers. comm. 98 Table 27. Summer, fall and total subsistence chum catch1 by Birch Creek and Fort Yukon, 1981-95. Birch Creek Fort Yukon Year Summer Fall Total Summer Fall Total Chum Chum Chum Chum Chum Chum 1981 -- - 8,149 16,143 24,292 1982 -- - 1,434 1,926 3,360 1983 -- - 7,142 3,967 11 '1 09 1984 - - - 3,032 7,525 10,557 1985 -- - 4,410 12,719 17,129 1986 - - - 3,264 8,543 11,807 1987 -- - 1,178 15,200 16,378 1988 0 0 0 7,717 2,766 10,483 1989 0 0 0 1,760 27,790 29,550 1990 0 0 0 145 11,627 11,772 1991 0 0 0 11,974 7,467 19,441 1992 0 0 0 1,700 2,284 3,984 1993 0 0 0 3,830 2,380 6,210 1994 0 0 0 2,043 6,827 8,870 1995 0 0 0 998 9,196 10,194 0 = No harvest - = Village not surveyed 1 Catches in numbers of fish. Source: Keith Schultz, ADF&G, pers. comm. 99 Table 28. Summer, fall and total subsistence chum catch 1 by Circle and Chalkyitsik, 1981-95. Circle Chalkyitsik Year Summer Fall Total Summer Fall Total Chum Chum Chum Chum Chum Chum 1981 2,009 5,219 7,228 - -- 1982 0 290 290 -- - 1983 73 3,687 3,760 -- - 1984 0 3,107 3,107 - -- 1985 930 4,096 5,026 - - - 1986 465 3,609 4,074 0 1,533 1,533 1987 2,087 7,691 9,778 0 2,686 2,686 1988 2,013 1,339 3,352 327 1,068 1,395 1989 55 1,985 2,040 0 3,000 3,000 1990 1,267 6,804 8,071 90 1,490 1,580 1991 51 6,413 6,464 500 100 600 1992 356 6,379 6,735 17 274 291 1993 83 349 1232 0 475 475 1994 98 4,581 4,679 0 1,751 1,751 1995 70 5,102 5,172 0 845 845 0 =No harvest -=Village not surveyed 1 Catches in numbers of fish. Source: Keith Schultz, ADF&G, pers. comm. 100 Table 29. Subsistence catch1 of coho salmon by villages on or near the Yukon Flats NWR, 1979-95. Year Stevens Birch Fort Village Creek Beaver Yukon Circle Chalkyitsik 1979 0 - 0 30 0 - 1980 181 - 5 0 0 - 1981 95 - 0 70 0 - 1982 23 - 0 125 0 - 1983 0 - 0 11 0 - 1984 145 - 0 33 0 - 1985 182 - 1 3 0 - 1986 67 - 124 118 37 8 1987 0 - 0 41 0 2 1988 604 0 164 370 101 801 1989 208 0 774 406 1 26 1990 479 0 172 727 206 4 1991 0 1 1 380 5 7 1992 20 0 398 341 54 0 1993 0 0 135 5 10 0 0 0 10 963 30 456 1994 1995 1 0 20 4 0 0 0 = No harvest - = Village not surveyed 1 Catches in numbers of fish. Source: Keith Schultz, ADF&G, pers. comm. 101 Commercial Fishing Commercial fishing also occurs in the Yukon River within the boundaries of Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, and this fishery is managed and regulated by ADF&G, Division of Commercial Fishery. Yukon Flats Refuge is in Subdistrict 5 D of the Yukon River Management Area. Subdistrict 5 D extends from the Yukon River Bridge upriver to the Canadian border. To participate in the commercial fishery, a fisher must possess a Yukon Area Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission Salmon Gear Permit for a particular subdistrict. Several residents of villages in or around Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge possess these salmon permits. In addition, residents of other areas of Alaska and non-Alaskan residents possess permits for Subdistrict 5 D. Two persons participated in the fishery this year. The commercial fishing for chinook salmon and summer chum was composed of three 36 hour periods from July 2 to July 18. The fall chum and coho salmon season was composed of two 24 hour periods and four 48 hour periods between August 16 and September 22. As in the subsistence fishery, four separate salmon runs are fished: chinook, summer chum, fall chum, and coho (Table 30). Both salmon meat and roe can be sold by commercial fishermen. In 1996, 114 lbs. of summer chum salmon roe was sold. The fall chum run is generally the most important to commercial fishers as was the case this year with 4,397 fish sold, but no roe was sold. The harvest of coho salmon was again zero. The 1996 commercial take of 448 chinook salmon is relatively minor compared to the subsistence fishery take of chinook salmon (Table 25). Those few fishers who fish in both subsistence and commercial fisheries meet their subsistence needs first and then sell the excess. Some local residents have expressed a desire to be allowed to sell fish caught under State subsistence provisions. However, the sale of subsistence fish is currently illegal. Table 30. Commercial salmon sales in District D (Yukon River Bridge to the Canadian border), 1995- 1996.1 Year Chinook Summer Fall Coho TOTAL Chum Chum 1995 489 0 3.979 0 4468 1996 448 127 4,397 0 4,972 1 Fish sales are expressed in number of fish. Source: Keith Schultz, ADF&G, pers. comm. 102 10. Trapping Subsistence and commercial trapping occur on the refuge, but since the refuge and the State of Alaska do not have a system of trapline registration, the number of trappers utilizing the refuge is not known. Some trappers are residents of villages within or near the refuge boundaries, while others are from communities such as Fairbanks or Anchorage. Trapping appears to be an important source of supplemental income to some rural residents. The trapping harvest is poorly understood and documented, with sealing data the chief information source. The State of Alaska requires only those species listed by the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) to be sealed (beaver, lynx, otter, wolf and wolverine). Marten, muskrat, red fox , and mink are considered by many to be the most important furbearers of the Yukon Flats, but no harvest data are available for these species as their hides are not sealed. In addition, some local residents trap and use the furs or hides to make parka ruffs, moccasins, or Native handicrafts. Animals taken for personal use are generally not sealed. Many species can be taken under both hunting and trapping provisions of the Alaska Fish and Game regulations, and harvest data are not separated into hunting take and trapping take. Fur prices, furbearer abundance, and weather conditions seem to be the dominant factors affecting harvest. However, lynx, our most cyclic species, have supported a relatively high and consistent yearly harvest within the Game Management Unit. The furbearer harvest for GMU 25(D) for 1983-1995 (most recent harvest data) is shown in Table 31 . A marten at Tulebagh Lake (8/96 Bertram). 103 Table 31. Furbearer harvest for GMU 25(0), 1983-1995. Year Beavr Lynx Marten Mink Musk- Otter Red Wolf Wolv- rat Fox erine 1983 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A 0 0 1984 30 155 N/A N/A N/A 2 N/A 7 7 1985 135 377 N/A N/A N/A 5 N/A 18 22 1986 339 296 N/A N/A N/A 6 N/A 26 15 1987 312 269 N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A 25 20 1988 269 291 N/A N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 16 1989 143 277 N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A 6 24 1990 69 212 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A 11 18 1991 147 247 N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A 21 15 1992 71 334 N/A N/A N/A 5 N/A 19 7 1993 13 128 707* N/A N/A 4 N/A 11 6 1994 83 186 N/A N/A N/A ·1 N/A 32 9 1995 66 155 N/A N/A N/A 6 N/A 17 5 N/A = Data are not available. *25(A),(B), and (D) combined. Source: Alaska Department of Fish and Game Harvest Summary, 1992-1994. In 1996, there were 20 active trapping cabin permits authorizing the use of36 cabins on the refuge. Two of the permits were new permits, and 18 were renewals. Of the total number of . permits, 12 were for rural residents using 15 cabins. These trapping cabins are extremely important to the subsistence users on the refuge. 12. Other Wildlife Oriented Recreation Yukon River Tours, a subsidiary ofDinyee Corporation of Stevens Village, conducts summer tours of a Koyukon Indian fish camp within the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge. The tours depart 2 to 4 times per day from the Yukon River Bridge on the Dalton Highway and last about 2 hours. Tourists receive a presentation on traditional Indian culture, subsistence lifestyles, and local ecology. At the fish camp, they view camp life and operations, and the preparation and preservation of salmon; they also have the chance to sample smoked and dried fish. The tourists are allowed to eat all the smoked fish that they want! In addition, Yukon 104 River Tours offers overnight trips to the camp, where tourists get to sleep in a tent and participate in fishing and fish preparation. Custom tours are also available from Yukon River Tours. The tours seem to be popular, and more tour buses and tourists are driving up the Dalton Highway. After 4 or 5 hours in a car or bus, tourists are often anxious for something to do. Also, an increasing number of tourists appear to be interested in cultural and ecological tourism. 13. Camping Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge is experiencing an increase in public use by river rafters and canoeists (both are locally known as floaters). Floaters can conveniently begin at Whitehorse, Dawson, Eagle, or Circle. Some groups travel down the Yukon River all the way to the Bering Sea. 17. Law Enforcement Routine patrols of refuge lands and waters were conducted during the more active portions of the hunting seasons. As is usually the case, much of our surveillance work is actually done during the course of our other work. Several previously undocumented cabins were located this year, and FMO Grissom sent letters to suspected owners to encourage them to submit cabin permit applications to legalize them. In March, WB/P Vivian and FMO Grissom flew three cabins that were posted. None of the cabins showed use during the winter. Two of the cabins were subsequently claimed by local residents. One stated that AFS staff told him that his cabins were burned by Fire A043 in 1988, and he never returned to check them. Information on spring waterfowl hunting and progress toward legalization of this traditional activity was again presented at village council meetings in several Flats villages. Most residents of the Yukon Flats now appear to have at least a basic understanding of the Service's policy on this controversial subject. One effort to assess traffic through Fort Yukon and Arctic Village by outside hunters was conducted in cooperation with a Special Agent from the Fairbanks SRA office. Rumors always seem to abound that large numbers of"outsiders" are transported through those airports by air taxi operators with lots of antlers and very little meat. Virtually no hunter movement through these airports was noted during the three days we spent there in the prime moose hunting period. In our experience, the air taxi operators in this part of the world are generally the first to report wanton waste committed by their customers. 105 FMO Grissom received training in wildfire cause investigation and was dispatched as an investigator to nine fires (see Section F.9). 18. Cooperating Associations A long and fruitful relationship with the Institute ofNorthem Forestry (INF) ended at the beginning of the year, a victim of the budget axe. The refuge and INF had cooperative agreements for 11 years to work on fire effects and fuels mapping projects. INF has been completely disbanded, and Joan Foote, our main cooperator, retired on February 1. 19. Concessions There are two big-game guide areas within the refuge: one area covers the southwest portion of the refuge, the other the northeast. The boundaries of these two areas coincide with State Game Management Unit boundaries 25 (D) West and 25 (A). These areas were selected based on: 1) big-game populations---the moose density in the southwest unit is lower than the northeast unit; 2) local resident concerns about "too many guides" and potential conflicts with subsistence hunters---hence we only proposed two areas; and 3) consistency with State regulations. In January of 1993, Mr. Sandy Jamieson (Bushcraft) was awarded the refuge permit for guide area YKF02, the northeast unit. Mr. Jamieson specializes in spring grizzly bear hunts (with wolf and black bear as a possibility), and fall "mixed bag" hunts (moose, caribou and bear). The southwest unit YKF01 was awarded to Mr. Joe Letarte (Wilderness Enterprises) in June of 1993. Moose hunting for this area is closed to non-local residents, so Mr. Letarte restricts his operation to spring bear hunting. During the 1996 season, Bushcraft guided five clients on the refuge for a period of33 days. Three of the clients were hunting for wolf and grizzly bear; they only harvested one grizzly bear. The fourth client just toured the refuge by air, while the fifth person spent two days camping on the refuge. Wilderness Enterprises guided ten individuals for 24 days of spring black bear hunting. They harvested ten black bears in 1996. In addition, two of their clients spent 15 days fishing. I. EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES 1. New Construction It is amazing how a little job can grow into a time devouring all consuming task. That's what happened when DRM Deines innocently volunteered in January to assist Cathy Curby of 106 Arctic staff to help design the new floor plan for the Yukon Flats, Kanuti and Arctic refuges. That was the beginning of space wars 1996 version. That small offer of volunteer assistance evolved into a fulltime effort designing the space, planning and ordering the new systems furniture, and overseeing the office construction and managing the moves, temporary and final. The intent of the project was to move all three refuges next door to each other on the , 2nd floor in the Federal building, give most people larger and better offices with systems furniture, and have some shared work spaces. Several draft floor plans were developed using a computer program called 3D Home Architect. As the draft plans were developed, they were presented to the staff for review and input. It became apparent that although most people thought it was a good idea, there were a few others who did not and would never be happy without a door and a private office. It was not easy designing a floor plan that was acceptable to three offices and the majority of their staffs. After a lot of discussion, a mutually agreeable floor plan was submitted to GSA on April 9th to obligate their moving funds. Then Anchorag~ GSA did their engineering wizardry and a final plan was approved much later. The next major hurdle was to plan the systems furniture for each person's office, develop a cost estimate, and find the funds necessary to buy it. Several systems furniture companies were investigated in this process. Some were eventually eliminated because of high cost, others because of poor quality. It was finally decided to go with TAB furniture because their systems furniture was of good quality, and because the three refuges had over $40,000 of existing TAB panels and furniture. Each staff member was interviewed for what they wanted in their individual office space. The draft plans were discussed with a representative ofTAB, and final plans/cost estimate developed. At that point it became readily apparent that without additional funding from the Regional office this project would never be completed. After some discussion, GARD Pospahala agreed to help with the project. Thanks to his support, the combined funds from the Region and field were enough to place the order. The furniture order was submitted to CGS in June with an expected delivery date in late October or early November. Work continued with GSA on the new office space and move. All three refuges had to move into temporary quarters in the building so construction could begin in their old space. This was supposed to happen in June but GSA did not have the spaces ready. The Yukon Flats and Kanuti refuges finally moved into temporary quarters on August 7th. Kanuti was moved downstairs and the Yukon Flats into an old BIA space on the first floor. The space for these two offices were just barely large enough. Everyone on staff now has a very good idea of what it feels like to be in a can of sardines. At least half of our furniture and supplies were placed in storage outside the Federal building. As would be expected, there were many times when we needed something from storage. Even though the boxes were all labeled, it was still next to impossible to find some items. Some ofthe Arctic staff moved into temporary quarters on the third floor in September. 107 September found us still trying to finalize the floor plan with Anchorage GSA. The drawings done by their engineer were not accurate. The outside dimensions for the entire space were off by six inches, and several support beams were either not drawn or were inaccurately placed. It was indeed a challenging project for DRM Deines to manage. Of course, as each of these errors were noted, it caused a corresponding shift or change in wall locations and furniture layout. Fortunately for all three refuges, the local GSA building manager and the construction contractor were excellent to work with on the project. Without their help to correct these major errors, who knows how our offices would have turned out. Construction on the three refuge offices finished up in late October. The furniture arrived the first week of November. DRM Deines, FWB Akaran, BT Zirkle of Kanuti, and ORP Edgerton of Arctic all worked with the Tab furniture folks and helped install the new furniture over Veterans Day weekend. Long hours were put in on the job, but refuge staff found their new offices ready for them the following Monday. Moving out of temporary quarters on the first floor of the Federal Building ( 11/96 Sowl). 108 Installing TAB office furniture in new quarters (11/96 Sowl). New office space for the Yukon Flats Refuge (12/96 Sowl). 109 New office cubicle with TAB furniture (12/96 Sowl). 4. Equipment Utilization and Replacement After the refuge aircraft was damaged in an accident (see Section E.6), a Cessna 185 which had recently been turned back to OAS (N70162) was quickly reconfigured to floats. N70162 served well through the remainder of the year, and will serve as our station aircraft until a replacement is procured. The wreckage ofN185CA was returned to Fairbanks on July 6, 1996 by contract helicopter. In October, the decision was made by the Office of Aircraft Services to sell the wreckage as is, rather than to restore it to flying condition. A bid offering was solicited and a company from eastern Washington State purchased the wreckage for just over $26,000. They intend to restore the aircraft to flying condition. After the dust settled somewhat, the refuge staff discussed our needs for a replacement aircraft and concluded that a Cessna 206 would suit our needs better than another Cessna 185. Our request and justification were forwarded to the Regional Aviation Manager and OAS in early December to initiate procurement action. The combination of accident reserves, replacement reserves, refurbishment reserves, and the sales receipts from the sale of the aircraft should provide sufficient funds to procure a used 206 in good condition. Since Cessna 110 has announced that they will return the 206 to production, it has been suggested that we wait to procure a new 206. However, the cost and the waiting period for a new airplane are the biggest problems with that suggestion. We have said that ifwe are assured of a "loaner" aircraft for the duration and the monies can be found, we support the concept of a new versus used aircraft. Two Fold~a-Bote twelve-foot folding boats were procured this year to evaluate their suitability for work on the Yukon Flats. In past, we have used either 12-foot pack canoes or 12-foot inflatables for our boating needs on the refuge. Although these boats are good, neither has proven to be ideal for our needs. We hope that the Fold-a-Bates will be easily transportable, as well as reasonably "seaworthy" with a small outboard. By being easily collapsible, they are relatively easy to transport on the float struts of a floatplane. At least one pilot from Central has used one of these boats for a number of years for duck hunting and fishing. The Fairbanks_ Aircraft Hangar continued to provide an inordinate number of maintenance difficulties this year, at least for a relatively new facility. Circulating water pumps failed, boilers sooted up because of poor drafting, heating circuit control valves failed, and water lines froze. The mechanical systems of this facility are rather complex. Some of our problems are related to valves which are no longer manufactured because of their unreliability. These are being replaced with a more reliable design. The domestic water line froze this fall due to a failure of the pump which circulates water between the main and our hangar. College Utilities had the water turned off while working on the main line and did not let us know that we needed to turn off the circulating pump. The pump subsequently overheated and failed and as soon as cold weather struck this fall, we had frozen pipes. This was discovered before the line burst, so it was a learning experience rather than a major excavation project. Region 7 Engineering Division has agreed to prepare a routine and recurring maintenance schedule for this facility. This should assist us in better managing a fairly complex system. Our intent is to contract a heating systems contractor in Fairbanks on a recurring maintenance schedule. The combination of control systems, mechanical systems, alarm circuits, and boilers requires greater expertise to maintain than any one individual would likely possess. There are contractors in Fairbanks with this expertise on their staffs. Hopefully, the maintenance schedule will be available before next winter. 5. Communications Systems Several problems were encountered with our radio system this year, almost all human induced. The Region 7 Regional Telecommunications Coordinator again arranged for Alaska Fire Service technicians to maintain and service our radio network. In addition, they were 111 instructed by him, over our protests, to replace our Fort Yukon base station with a used GE base station removed from another station's headquarters. Several disconnects occurred in the ensuing melee, the results of which were several short and one long outage of our entire radio system. Fortunately, only two crews were in the field during the long outage. The fishery crew on the Chandalar already had a satellite telephone system as a back up, and Alaska Fire Service provided the Sheenjek crew with a satellite phone system during the radio outage. Most of the problems were related to a lack of information and documentation provided to the AFS radio technicians on our existing system, and initially, at least, their failure to contact the refuge office for information on the system. In addition, these technicians were not familiar with the type of equipment we were using and had a great deal of difficulty understanding how the system was intended to function. Alaska Fire Service apparently uses only one configuration for their radio systems statewide, so they are familiar with only a small sample of radio equipment. In their defense, it is difficult to take over a system which someone else has designed and try to make sense of it. Then again, the technician we previously used had never seen any of this type equipment before either. The technicians were not able to make the used GE radio work, so they replaced it with a cobbled together base station made from spare repeater (rather than base station) components. The system would then work in some locations, but not all, and it was not, shall we say, a very tidy installation. Eventually, the AFS Radio Shop installed a brand new GE Master III base station from their warehouse, which was excess to their needs because they had recently closed some stations. Again to their credit, AFS did not ask us to reimburse them for this rather expensive unit. They felt that they could provide much better service to us if they were working on a make and model of radio which they are familiar with. Hopefully, this system will work adequately and restore our system to its previous reliability level. The Lone Mountain repeater lost some performance this year for reasons apparently related to moisture damage to the antenna. Alaska Fire Service plans to replace that antenna during their annual service visit next spring. This year's radio difficulties were quite disappointing to us, since this system has been so reliable for many years. Sometimes fixing something which isn't broken is more difficult than one could ever imagine. In more than one case in the past few years, we have had crews in the field who thought they had radio communications when in fact the system was taken out of service by someone outside our control. We believe that the Alaska Fire Service Radio Shop personnel will now communicate with us on any matters pertaining to our system. They have been very helpful and cooperative since we finally managed to get through to them. Hopefully, we will be kept in the loop. Unfortunately, they were not given adequate information when they were tasked 112 to maintain our system. This does not appear to be an isolated incident. It is extremely frustrating to operate a system yourself, with virtually no problems, only to have someone else take maintenance responsibility away from you, resulting in numerous outages and incredible amounts of time devoted to sorting out problems. When these radios could be your lifeline to a medivac, you want to know their status and have some say in their maintenance. We were very fortunate that our crews did not experience any difficulties during periods of radio outages. We much prefer to coordinate and communicate our radio maintenance and servicing needs ourselves, even if the work is done by AFS. 6. Computer Systems Our staff enjoyed a year of maintenance free printer sharing under Windows for Work Groups 3 .1. There is absolutely no comparison between Windows for Work Groups 3 .1 and our old systemizer, which was very undependable, and required a lot of attention. In November of 1996, all three refuges (Arctic, Kanuti and Yukon Flats) were moved into the same wing of the Federal Building. With all three refuges co-located, a Novell network was installed linking all three of the refuges, NAES, and Fisheries onto one local network. This action required establishing a Network Administrator and an Assistant Network Administrator position. Since these positions were established, our Administrative Technician will be relieved of maintaining office computers, upgrading programs, and assisting other computer users, as these tasks will now become the responsibility of the Network Administrators. Our Network Administrators ordered and installed several Pentium machines, so that everyone on staffhas a computer capable of running heavy software programs. The administrators have done a good job of setting up and maintaining the network. J. OTHER ITEMS 3. Credits The following is a list of refuge staff and the sections of this report on which they worked: Bertram ...... D.5, G.3, G.8, G.10 Deines ...... F.l, F.2, H.l, H.2, H.12, H.l3, H.19, 1.1, editing Emers ...... F.6 Gaston ...... 1.6 113 Grissom ...... B, F.6, F.9, H.17, H. IS Heuer ...... A, D.2, E.l, E.2, E.4, E.S, G.12, H.7, editing McClellan ..... H.S, H.9, H.IO Sowl ... ~ ..... B, G. I, G.2, G.4, G.S, G.6, G.7, G.14, G.16, assembly, collation, editing Vivian ...... E.6, E.7, H.2, H.17, I.4, I.S, K K. FEEDBACK Office of Aircraft Services The Office of Aircraft Services (OAS) is an independent bureau within the Department of the Interior, with primary authority to provide oversight over aircraft operations within the various bureaus of the Department of the Interior. Since its inception in the early 1970's, opinions within the Fish and Wildlife Service have varied widely on the effectiveness and usefulness ofOAS. In recent years, many ofus have not been very complimentary ofOAS. In the past few years, OAS has undergone an audit by the Inspector General's Office, and at least partially as a result of this audit, has changed many of its practices. In addition, changes in personnel in upper level positions, both in Alaska and in OAS headquarters, as well as a very active Secretary's representative on aviation issues, have all combined to reshape the basic attitude and philosophy of OAS. For the first time ever, we have received an explanation of how aircraft rates are established, where the monies are going, and we (the user agencies) actually have a part in guiding some of the decisions which are being made on these issues. We may still not like the prices a lot, but at least it now appears that there is actually some logic being applied in the establishment of those rates. This year in particular, our experiences with OAS were almost uniformly positive ones. After the loss of our assigned aircraft in an accident, OAS responded quickly to investigate the accident in a very professional manner and retrieve the wreckage from the accident site withing two days of the accident. The pilot was administratively grounded by policy (as is the case after any accident), but an OAS check airman was sent to Fairbanks within two days to recard him. OAS accident investigator Dave Broadnax (Boise, OAS) ensured that the pilot was thoroughly briefed on every action and procedure during the accident investigation, including assuring that he was invited to witness the engine tear down by OAS, FAA and NTSB personnel, which, it turned out, was a positive learning experience. 114 OAS maintenance personnel pulled an aircraft (N70162) in from the Alaska Peninsula which was on loan, retrieved a set of floats from storage and brought them up to flyable status, adapted them to the aircraft (which had not been on this model float before), and turned that aircraft over for our use. The entire process just described took place in less than ten days. This year, we had very positive experiences with OAS maintenance, which in recent years had frankly been a major headache for all Service aircraft operators. Maintenance went through an O:rvr.B A-76 process this year, and John Alley, the new chief of maintenance (and a long time mechanic at OAS) tackled the challenge of making OAS maintenance a competitive and efficient enterprise. It is incredibly refreshing to call OAS maintenance with a request, and receive a positive and friendly response, as well as immediate assistance in getting our aircraft back on line and fully operational. For the first time in as long as we can recall, we took two aircraft to Anchorage OAS for periodic inspections and both aircraft were in and out of the hangar in less than three days each. Past inspections, which often stretched out to two to three weeks, had caused us to avoid OAS mruntenance like the plague in recent years. In short, OAS seems to have dramatically changed its corporate attitude toward its function and toward the user bureaus, and the change is a welcome one. For once, a government support organization appears to be trying to improve its performance and become more responsive to its customers, the other federal agencies who rely on OAS for safe and economical aircraft services. We applaud their efforts. State Law Enforcement Authority for Refuge Officers The Yukon Flats consists of an incredibly complex patchwork ofland ownership. With refuge lands, village and regional corporation lands, Native allotments, homesteads, and easements, it is often impossible to tell for sure who owns any particular piece of land on the Flats without a survey followed by half a day's research in BLM' s public room to research ownership. For the general public this creates quite a potential for unintentional trespass. For the Refuge Law Enforcement Officer in the course of his or her duties, it could create a much more serious situation. When we make a law enforcement contact in the field, we are often uncertain of the status of the land where the contact is being made. Literally hundreds of allotments dot the countryside, and none are marked in any way. Furthermore, refuge officers often spend a considerable amount of time in the several villages of the Yukon Flats, conducting both law enforcement and other duties. We certainly spend more time in some of the Yukon Flats villages than do State enforcement personnel. The people of those villages occasionally approach us for assistance in pursuing a fish or game violation. While we have no desire to take on the responsibility for enforcement of state law on private lands, we feel we do have a responsibility to respond to a situation which could completely change by the time a state officer could get there. An additional consideration is the cost of transportation 115 to these villages. Additionally, there are the liability considerations for the individual officer associated with approaching or interviewing a subject on what may or may not be refuge lands. The legal implications if such a contact were to turn ugly are pretty frightening to those of us who could. be faced with this potential. For several years now, we have requested that our Regional Office seek deputy State enforcement authority for game and fish laws for Refuge Officers on at least some areas. Our Special Agents carry such authority. This request seems to have reached a political stalemate and has not progressed in some time. What will it take to move forward on this matter? A lawsuit against one of our refuge personnel? Criminal charges against one of our officers? These are things we have to consider every time we approach someone in the field. It is time to treat our Alaska Refuge Officers like the well-trained, responsible, professionals that they are and seek state fish and wildlife enforcement authority for them. L. LITERATURE CITED Bergstrom, D, K. Schultz, and B. Borba. 1996. Salmon Fisheries in the Yukon Area, Alaska, 1995. In Regional Information Report No. 3A96-03. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage, Alaska. Conant, B. and D.J. Groves. 1995. Alaska-Yukon waterfowl breeding population survey. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Unpubl. Rpt. 25pp. DeSante, D.F., K.M. Burton, and O.E. Williams. 1993. The Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS) Program Second (1992) Annual Report. In Bird Populations, Vol. 1 (1993). Handel, Colleen M. 1994. Instructions for conducting off-road breeding bird point counts in Alaska. Sponsored by Alaska Partners in Flight. Unpublished document of the Alaska Fish and Wildlife Research Center, Anchorage, Alaska. Lensink, C.J. 1965. Waterfowl ofthe Yukon Flats, Alaska. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Unpubl. Rpt. 129pp. Viereck, L.A., C.T. Dyrness, A.R Batten, and K.J. Wenzlick. 1992. The Alaska vegetation classification. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-286. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.