DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Mile Post 1339, Alaska Hwy 20 Miles West of Tok, Alaska Prepared for: U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Prepared by: Alaska Power & Telephone Company Corporate Headquarters Port Townsend, Washington April 2010 Author: Glen Martin – Project Manager Alaska Power & Telephone Company P.O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-1733 x122 (360) 385-7538 fax [email protected] SUMMARY The USDA Rural Utilities Service (RUS) has selected the Alaska Power & Telephone Company (AP&T) as a finalist in its High Energy Cost Grant Program to construct the proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (or Project). The proposed Project would be located approximately twenty miles west of Tok, Alaska, at Mile Post 1339 on the Alaska Highway. The proposed Project would supply renewable energy to four communities in the Tok area: Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Tok. Prior to making an award for a partial grant, RUS has determined that an Environmental Assessment (EA) must be prepared, pursuant to 7 CFR Part 1794, RUS’s Environmental Policies and Procedures, as amended. This EA identifies environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed Project. It has been decided that impacts associated with upgrading the supporting transmission system would be minimal, as the infrastructure already exists and would only require minor upgrading and the stringing of a higher voltage conductor. All of this work would occur in previously disturbed rights-of-way that previously have been cleared of vegetation. The Project would be located on lands owned by the state of Alaska and Tanacross, Inc. This proposed Project is needed because the communities of Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Tok rely on diesel generation for their electricity, which is expensive and fluctuates frequently. The Project would reduce electric rates to these four communities by approximately 20%. Several of these communities are on the Denali Commission’s list of distressed communities1 as this area is experiencing a significant economic downturn. Reducing electric rates may help the local economy. The results of the impact analysis show the project may have the follow environmental affects: Temporarily impact wildlife due to noise from construction activity, which may temporarily impact hunting in the area Have a minor impact to wetlands, by placing fill in the creek (i.e. diversion structure, bridge piers (2), part of tailrace) Have a minor impact to Dolly Varden and Arctic grayling in the bypass section of Yerrick Creek during winter and late summer months because of low flow Provide easier access for recreation, potentially disturbing wildlife Reduce the use of diesel in Tok, which in turn would reduce air emissions of green- house gases and particulate matter as well as reducing opportunities for fuel spills 1 Dot Lake, Tanacross, and Tetlin are on the 2009 Denali Commission list of distressed communities. Tok was on the 2008 list. Page | ii TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. iv LIST OF APPENDICES....................................................................................................... iv LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................... v 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................ 3 3 PURPOSE/NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION............................................................ 5 4 ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................................................... 6 4.1 No Action............................................................................................................... 6 4.2 Energy Generation Technologies Considered ....................................................... 6 4.3 Alternative Locations for siting the hydroelectric facility..................................... 7 5 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT..................................................................................... 8 5.1 Land Use................................................................................................................ 8 5.2 Cultural Resources and Historic Properties ........................................................... 8 5.3 Biological Resources........................................................................................... 10 5.3.1 Fish Resources............................................................................................. 10 5.3.2 Wildlife (mammal) Review ......................................................................... 11 5.3.3 TES botanical survey ................................................................................... 14 5.4 Water Quality & Quantity.................................................................................... 15 5.4.1 Water Quality............................................................................................... 15 5.4.2 Water Quantity............................................................................................. 15 5.5 Floodplains/Wetlands .......................................................................................... 16 5.6 Environmental Justice.......................................................................................... 17 5.7 Socioeconomics ................................................................................................... 17 6 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.................................................................. 19 6.1 Alternative 1: No – Action................................................................................... 19 6.2 Alternative 2: The Proposed Project.................................................................... 19 6.2.1 Land Use...................................................................................................... 19 6.2.2 Cultural Resources and Historic Properties ................................................. 20 6.2.3 Biological Resources................................................................................... 20 6.2.4 Water Quality & Quantity............................................................................ 21 6.2.5 Floodplains/Wetlands .................................................................................. 21 6.2.6 Environmental Justice.................................................................................. 22 6.2.7 Socioeconomics ........................................................................................... 22 7 MITAGATION AND PERMITS ................................................................................ 23 8 LITERATURE CITED................................................................................................ 25 9 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 27 9.1 Agency Correspondence.......................................................................................... 9.2 Hydrology Studies................................................................................................... 9.3 Biological and Other Surveys .................................................................................. 9.4 2009 Denali Commission List of Distressed Communities..................................... Page | iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of Proposed Project Area .............................................................................. 1 Figure 2: Proposed Project Features ..................................................................................... 2 Figure 3: Transmission Line Features................................................................................... 4 LIST OF APPENDICES 9.1 – Project Correspondence 9.2 – Hydrology / Feasibility Report 9.3 – Biological Surveys 9.3.1 – Fish Resources Report 9.3.2 – Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive (TES) Plant Report 9.3.3 – Literature Review and Field Report: Hydrology Baseline Study 9.3.4 – Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination 9.3.5 – Heritage Resource Survey 9.4 – 2009 Denali Commission List of Distressed Communities Page | iv LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS % percent ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish & Game AKNHP Alaska National Historic Preservation ALA APE area of potential effect AP&T Alaska Power and Telephone ATV All terrain vehicle cfs cubic feet per second CO2 carbon dioxide DNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources EA Environmental Assessment HDPE kV kilovolt kWh kilowatt-hour MW megawatt NEPA National Environmental Policy Act OHW Ordinary high water (mark) pop. population ROW right-of-way RUS Rural Utilities Service SHPO State Historic Preservation Office TES threatened, endangered, and sensitive (species) USACOE U.S. Army Corp of Engineers USGS U.S. Geological Service Page | v 1 INTRODUCTION The USDA Rural Utilities Service (RUS) has selected the Alaska Power & Telephone Company (AP&T) as a finalist in its High Energy Cost Grant Program to construct the proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (20 Miles west of Tok, Alaska at Mile Post 1339, Alaska Hwy). The granting of funds by
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Big Delta Quadrangle Delta Big 1:250,000 - 3645
    Big Delta quadrangle Descriptions of the mineral occurrences shown on the accompanying figure follow. See U.S. Geological Survey (1996) for a description of the information content of each field in the records. The data presented here are maintained as part of a statewide database on mines, prospects and mineral occurrences throughout Alaska. o o o o o o o o Distribution of mineral occurrences in the Big Delta 1:250,000-scale quadrangle, Alaska This and related reports are accessible through the USGS World Wide Web site http://ardf.wr.usgs.gov. Comments or information regarding corrections or missing data, or requests for digital retrievals should be directed to Donald Grybeck, USGS, 4200 Unversity Dr., Anchorage, AK 99508-4667, email [email protected], telephone (907) 786-7424. This compilation is authored by: Cameron Rombach Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys 794 University Ave., Suite 200 Fairbanks, AK 99709-3645 Alaska Resource Data File This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geologi- cal Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic code. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. OPEN-FILE REPORT 99-354 Alaska Resource Data File BD001 Site name(s): Banner Creek Site type: Mines ARDF no.: BD001 Latitude: 64.316 Quadrangle: BD B-5 Longitude: 146.346 Location description and accuracy: Banner Creek drains southward into the Tanana River. The approximate center of min- ing activity on Banner Creek is in SW1/4SW1/4 section 10, T.
    [Show full text]
  • Prairie Lupine (Lupinus Lepidus) Is a Perennial Herb That Grows 20-45 Cm Tall
    COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Prairie Lupine Lupinus lepidus in Canada ENDANGERED 2009 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2009. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Prairie Lupine Lupinus lepidus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 34 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Previous reports: COSEWIC 2000. COSEWIC assessment and status on the Prairie Lupine Lupinus lepidus var. lepidus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 18 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm) Ryan, M., and G.W. Douglas. 1996. COSEWIC status report on the Prairie Lupine Lupinus lepidus var. lepidus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-18 pp. Production note: COSEWIC acknowledges Carrina Maslovat for writing the update status report on Prairie Lupine, Lupinis lepidus in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada, overseen and edited by Erich Haber, Co-chair, COSEWIC Vascular Plants Specialist Subcommittee For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur le lupin élégant (Lupinus lepidus) au Canada – Mise à jour. Cover photo: Prairie Lupine — used with permission from H. Roemer. ©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Viewing
    Wildlife Viewing Common Yukon roadside flowers © Government of Yukon 2019 ISBN 987-1-55362-830-9 A guide to common Yukon roadside flowers All photos are Yukon government unless otherwise noted. Bog Laurel Cover artwork of Arctic Lupine by Lee Mennell. Yukon is home to more than 1,250 species of flowering For more information contact: plants. Many of these plants Government of Yukon are perennial (continuously Wildlife Viewing Program living for more than two Box 2703 (V-5R) years). This guide highlights Whitehorse, Yukon Y1A 2C6 the flowers you are most likely to see while travelling Phone: 867-667-8291 Toll free: 1-800-661-0408 x 8291 by road through the territory. Email: [email protected] It describes 58 species of Yukon.ca flowering plant, grouped by Table of contents Find us on Facebook at “Yukon Wildlife Viewing” flower colour followed by a section on Yukon trees. Introduction ..........................2 To identify a flower, flip to the Pink flowers ..........................6 appropriate colour section White flowers .................... 10 and match your flower with Yellow flowers ................... 19 the pictures. Although it is Purple/blue flowers.......... 24 Additional resources often thought that Canada’s Green flowers .................... 31 While this guide is an excellent place to start when identi- north is a barren landscape, fying a Yukon wildflower, we do not recommend relying you’ll soon see that it is Trees..................................... 32 solely on it, particularly with reference to using plants actually home to an amazing as food or medicines. The following are some additional diversity of unique flora. resources available in Yukon libraries and bookstores.
    [Show full text]
  • Seasonal Habitats of Arctic Grayling in the Upper Goodpaster River Gold Mining District
    Regional Operational Plan SF.3F.2014.06 Operational Plan: Seasonal Habitats of Arctic Grayling in the Upper Goodpaster River Gold Mining District by Andrew D. Gryska March 2015 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries Symbols and Abbreviations The following symbols and abbreviations, and others approved for the Système International d'Unités (SI), are used without definition in the following reports by the Divisions of Sport Fish and of Commercial Fisheries: Fishery Manuscripts, Fishery Data Series Reports, Fishery Management Reports, and Special Publications. All others, including deviations from definitions listed below, are noted in the text at first mention, as well as in the titles or footnotes of tables, and in figure or figure captions. Weights and measures (metric) General Mathematics, statistics centimeter cm Alaska Administrative all standard mathematical deciliter dL Code AAC signs, symbols and gram g all commonly accepted abbreviations hectare ha abbreviations e.g., Mr., Mrs., alternate hypothesis HA kilogram kg AM, PM, etc. base of natural logarithm e kilometer km all commonly accepted catch per unit effort CPUE liter L professional titles e.g., Dr., Ph.D., coefficient of variation CV meter m R.N., etc. common test statistics (F, t, χ2, etc.) milliliter mL at @ confidence interval CI millimeter mm compass directions: correlation coefficient east E (multiple) R Weights and measures (English) north N correlation coefficient cubic feet per second ft3/s south S (simple) r foot ft west W covariance cov gallon gal copyright degree (angular ) ° inch in corporate suffixes: degrees of freedom df mile mi Company Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Identity, History and the Athabaskan Potlatch
    IDENTITY, HISTORY AND THE NORTHERN ATHABASKAN PO'rLATCH rrr ~ r A thesis Submitted to the Sctlool of Graduate Studies In partial fulfi I ment of the req u i remen ts for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University i c! DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (1990) McMASTER UNIVERSITY (Anthropology) Hamilton, ontario TITLE: Identity, History and the Athabaskan Potlatch AUTHOR: William E.Simeone, B.A. (University of Alaska) M.A. (McMaster University) SUPERVISOR: Professor Harvey Feit NUMBER OF PAGES: vi, 274 ii ABSTRACT A basic theme underlying Athabaskan culture and the potlatch is the duality of competition and cooperation. In the literature on both the Northwest Coast and Athabaskan potlatch this duality is most often considered in one of two ways: as a cultural phenomenon which is functional and ahistorical in nature, or as a product of Native and White contact. In this study I take a less radical view. within Athabaskan culture and the potlatch cooperation and competition exist in a historically reticulate duality which provides the internal dynamic in Northern Athabaskan culture and continues to motivate attempts to redefine the culture and the potlatch. In the context of political and economic domination, however, the duality becomes an opposition in which competition is submerged and reshaped into a symbol for the White man, while cooperation becomes a symbol for unity and Indianness. The resulting ideology, or "Indian way," becomes a critique of the current situation and a vision of things as they should be. The potlatch is the major arena in which this vision derived from the past is reproduced. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research for this dissertation would have been impossible without financial help from the School of Graduate Studies, McMaster University.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Natural Heritage Program National Park Service Alaska
    GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT Matthew L. Carlson, Keith Boggs, Robert Lipkin, & Julie A. Michaelson Alaska Natural Heritage Program Environment and Natural Resources Institute University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 National Park Service Alaska Region Inventory & Monitoring Program NPS Report : April 2004 Cooperative Agreement No. 1443CA991000013 Funding Source: National Park Service, Inventory & Monitoring Program 1 GLACIER BAY NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE VASCULAR PLANT INVENTORY ABSTRACT In 2001 and 2003 the Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP) conducted vascular plant field inventories in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve in accordance with a cooperative agreement with the National Park Service. The primary goal was to document greater than 90% of the vascular plant species expected to occur within the park and significantly improve our understanding of current species distributions. The inventory targeted diverse habitat types and poorly-sampled areas. The AKNHP staff visited eight diverse ecogeographic regions and sampled intensively within these regions from late June to mid-August, 2001 and late June to early July in 2003. A total of 555 specimens were collected, recorded, pressed, and curated. Of the 333 individual taxa, 172 are new records for the park and an additional 44 represent verifications of previously unverified reports. A number of finds were significant range extensions or taxa of conservation concern. Collections were made of four globally restricted species: Botrychium ascendens (G2G3-S2 AKNHP rank), Platanthera chorisiana (G3-S3), Eleocharis kamtschatica (G4-S2S3), and Salix setchelliana (G4-S3). A number of collections were made of species which are very rare in Alaska, but more widespread in western North America, such as Agoseris aurantiaca, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Yukon and Kuskokwim Whitefish Strategic Plan
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Whitefish Biology, Distribution, and Fisheries in the Yukon and Kuskokwim River Drainages in Alaska: a Synthesis of Available Information Alaska Fisheries Data Series Number 2012-4 Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office Fairbanks, Alaska May 2012 The Alaska Region Fisheries Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducts fisheries monitoring and population assessment studies throughout many areas of Alaska. Dedicated professional staff located in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Kenai Fish and Wildlife Offices and the Anchorage Conservation Genetics Laboratory serve as the core of the Program’s fisheries management study efforts. Administrative and technical support is provided by staff in the Anchorage Regional Office. Our program works closely with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and other partners to conserve and restore Alaska’s fish populations and aquatic habitats. Our fisheries studies occur throughout the 16 National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska as well as off- Refuges to address issues of interjurisdictional fisheries and aquatic habitat conservation. Additional information about the Fisheries Program and work conducted by our field offices can be obtained at: http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/index.htm The Alaska Region Fisheries Program reports its study findings through the Alaska Fisheries Data Series (AFDS) or in recognized peer-reviewed journals. The AFDS was established to provide timely dissemination of data to fishery managers and other technically oriented professionals, for inclusion in agency databases, and to archive detailed study designs and results for the benefit of future investigations. Publication in the AFDS does not preclude further reporting of study results through recognized peer-reviewed journals.
    [Show full text]
  • VOLUME 23 JULY 1, 1981 - June 30, 1982 {.A 3 FEDERAL AID in FISH RESTORATION Pf.0 and ANADROMOUS FISH STUDIES
    St~ 11 ,A73 l !f .", VOLUME 23 JULY 1, 1981 - June 30, 1982 {.a 3 FEDERAL AID IN FISH RESTORATION pf.0 AND ANADROMOUS FISH STUDIES LAKE AND STREAM INVESTIGATIONS G-III-G William P. Ridder ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Ronald O. Skoog, Commissioner Division of Sport Fish E. Richard Logan, Director Juneau, Alaska ARLIS ' Alaska ReSources LIbrar 8 '- Y l. Information Servt Anch vices orage, Ah:sL 'I. TABLE OF CONTENTS Study No. G-III LAKE & STREAM INVESTIGATIONS PAGE Job. No. G-III-G A Study of A Typical Spring-fed Stream of Interior Alaska By: William P. Ridder Abstract • 1 Key Words ••••• .... .... ..... 3 Background ...... 3 Techniques 5 Recommendations •••• ••••••••• 8 Objectives. ..... ..... 8 Findings .... ....... .. 9 Monitoring of Arctic grayling and round whitefish stocks ••••• 9 Delta Clearwater River ••••••••••••••••• 16 Richardson Clearwater River •••••••••••••• 21 Clear Creek ........................... 25 Angler Harvest •••••••• 29 Richardson Clearwater River •••••••• 37 Shaw Creek ••••••••••••• 37 Grayling Stock Enhancement ••••• 38 Post-Spawning Migration Investigations •• 43 Scale Analysis •• •••• 52 Literature Cited ••••••• 60 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Figure 1. Tanana-Clearwater Study Area. •••• 4 Table 1. List of Common, scientific names, and abbreviations of fish species mentioned in this report. .................... 6 Figure 2. Caribou Creek Weir. •••••••••••••••• •• 7 Table 2. Temperature and catch recordings during spring monitoring at Mile One Slough of the Delta Clearwater River, 1981. ••••••••••• 10 Table 3. Summary of fish captured by fyke trap and CPUE for grayling and round whitefish at Mile One Slough, Delta Clearwater River, 1976-1981 •••• 11 Table 4. Composition and length ranges of fish species captured at Mile One slough, April 17-May 1, 1981 • •• 13 Table 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Our Home and Native Land: Canadian Species of Global Conservation Concern
    Our Home and Native Land Canadian Species of Global Conservation Concern NatureServe Canada contributes to the conservation of Canada’s biodiversity by providing scientific data and expertise about species and ecosystems of conservation concern to support decision-making, research, and education. Citation: Cannings, S., M. Anions, R. Rainer, and B. Stein. 2005. Our Home and Native Land: Canadian Species of Global Conservation Concern. NatureServe Canada: Ottawa, Ontario. © NatureServe Canada 2005 ISBN 0-9711053-4-0 Primary funding for the publication of this report was provided by the Suncor Energy Foundation. This report is also available in French. To request a copy, please contact NatureServe Canada. NatureServe Canada 960 Carling Avenue Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6 613-759-1861 www.natureserve-canada.ca Our Home and Native Land Canadian Species of Global Conservation Concern by Sydney Cannings Marilyn F. E. Anions Rob Rainer Bruce A. Stein Sydney Cannings NatureServe Yukon Fish and Wildlife Branch Yukon Department of the Environment P.O. Box 2703 Whitehorse, Yukon Y1A 2C6 867-667-3684 Marilyn F. E. Anions NatureServe Canada 960 Carling Avenue Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6 Note on Captions: For each species, captions state the range in Canada only, as well as the NatureServe global conservation status. 613-759-1942 Rob Rainer Front Cover Chelsea, Québec Left to right: Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus). Vulnerable (G3). 819-827-9082 British Columbia. / Photo by Jared Hobbs. Golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta). Critically imperiled (G1). British Bruce A. Stein, Ph.D. Columbia. / Photo by Leah Ramsay, British Columbia Conservation Data NatureServe Centre. 1101 Wilson Blvd., 15th Floor Spotted owl (Strix occidentalis).
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 6. Pre-Construction Rare Plant Surveys
    Appendix 6. Pre-construction Rare Plant Surveys INTERIM REPORT PRE-CONSTRUCTION RARE PLANT SURVEYS SITE C CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT PREPARED BY: EAGLE CAP CONSULTING LTD. 1103-240 70 SHAWVILLE BLVD. SE CALGARY, ALBERTA T2Y 2Z3 PREPARED FOR: BC HYDRO AND POWER AUTHORITY SUITE 600, 4 BENTALL CENTRE 1055 DUNSMUIR STREET PO BOX 49260 VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA NOVEMBER 11, 2017 INTERIM REPORT – PRECONSTRUCTION RARE PLANT SURVEYS – SITE C CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT Contents 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Scope ............................................................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Areas Targeted for Pre-construction Surveys ............................................................................... 3 2.0 Methods ............................................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Prefield Review ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Field Survey ................................................................................................................................... 5 3.0 Results ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • List of Alaskan Seed Plant and Fern Names Compiled from ALA, ACCS, PAF, WCSP, FNA
    List of Alaskan Seed Plant and Fern names Compiled from ALA, ACCS, PAF, WCSP, FNA (Questions to [email protected]) January 18, 2020 Acoraceae Acorus americanus (Raf.) Raf. (GUID: trop-2100001). In Alaska according to ALA, FNA. An accepted name according to ALA, FNA.A synonym of: • Acorus calamus var. americanus Raf. according to WCSP ; Comments: WCSP Acorus calamus L. (GUID: ipni-84009-1). In Alaska according to ACCS. An accepted name according to WCSP, ACCS. Adoxaceae Adoxa moschatellina L. (GUID: ipni-5331-2). In Alaska according to ALA, PAF, ACCS. An accepted name according to ALA, PAF, WCSP, ACCS. Sambucus pubens Michx. (GUID: ipni-227191-2). In Alaska according to ACCS. An accepted name according to WCSP, ALA.A synonym of: • Sambucus racemosa subsp. pubens (Michx.) Hultén according to PAF ; Comments: Subspecies [pubens] reaches the Arctic in southwestern Alaska. This hardy race is introduced in northern Norway and Iceland, escaping in Iceland, and may be found in the arctic parts. • Sambucus racemosa subsp. pubens (Michx.) House according to ACCS ; Comments: Panarctic Flora Checklist Sambucus racemosa L. (GUID: ipni-30056767-2). In Alaska according to ACCS. An accepted name according to ALA, WCSP, ACCS. Sambucus racemosa subsp. pubens (Michx.) House (GUID: NULL). In Alaska according to ACCS. An accepted name according to ACCS. Sambucus racemosa subsp. pubens (Michx.) Hultén (GUID: ipni-227221-2). In Alaska according to ALA, PAF. An accepted name according to ALA, PAF. Viburnum edule (Michx.) Raf. (GUID: ipni-149665-1). In Alaska according to ALA, PAF, ACCS. An accepted name according to ALA, PAF, ACCS. Viburnum opulus L.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Natural Resources by the Residents of Dot Lake, Alaska, Located in the Tanana River Valley on the Alaska
    USE OF NATURAL RESOURCESBY THE RESIDENTS OF DOT LAKE, ALASKA Gayle Martin Resource Specialist II Technical Paper No. 19 Division of Subsistence Alaska Department of Fish and Game Fairbanks, Alaska June 1983 USE OF NATURAL RESOURCESBY THE RESIDENTS OF DOT LAKE, ALASKA by GAYLE MARTIN ABSTRACT This study addresses the use of natural resources by the residents of Dot Lake, Alaska, located in the Tanana River valley on the Alaska Highway approximately 160 miles southeast of Fairbanks. Findings are based on fieldwork conducted during summer 1982 by the Division of Sub- sistence, Interior Region, Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Methods of research included literature review, informal and formal interviews with residents, mapping sessions and participant-observation. The community's 50 Athabaskan and non-Athabaskan residents comprise 15 households. Wage employment opportunities are extremely limited; there were only three permanent full-time jobs in the community in 1982. Some residents are employed on a part-time or temporary basis, but 48 percent of the adult population was unemployed in 1982. Residents depend heavily on the local harvest of wild food resources, as incomes are generally too low to permit reliance on purchased groceries alone. Dot Lake residents participate in a wide variety of resource harvest activities, including hunting for moose, caribou, sheep, black bear, grizzly bear, spruce grouse, ruffed grouse, willow ptarmigan, rock ptarmigan, snowshoe hare, porcupine, squirrels, and waterfowl; trapping twelve species of furbearers; fishing for four species of whitefish, five species of salmon, northern pike, suckers, lake trout, and Dolly Varden; and gathering seven species of berries, roots, mushrooms, edible greens, birch bark, spruce root and firewood.
    [Show full text]