A Game Management Program for the North Slope Introduction
and intensifiedbld ones for resource management agencies in . , ..
I.
ee aspects ofindustr;ial expansion: 1) development of new .··--.- - >
air and surface access; 2) damage to soil and vegetation, and ': ~ . '
degredation of a'riimal habitats; 3) rising demand for recreational
opportunity.
The Departrqent .of Fish and Game never used to consider Alaska
nore1 of the Arctic Circle as a "problem area" because of the
.absence of indust.rialization and the large supply of wildlife in
re.i_a tion to demari,d. Conditions and attitudes have changed
since' J-uly 1968i:' the North is now given high priority among
Deparbnenta 1 management problems.
: - --__._.;,' -: . ' '
biologists. Th.is strangeness, plus the fact that the industry
< <
Department's ability to predict the scope and nature of its new
resource management prob~ems is limited. The situation is
,,·;.--'
2
\von>en~:~d by the g~nera 1 :aura of secrecy the industry wraps
ource managers scribble plans in
Biologists; wha. .know little about game and fish resources
in northern Alaska, are in good company. Other resource agencies
have very slende~ files on the. Arct£c 1 and science has taken only .·.':·.;:.
a quick look around in t'he north. The widespread interest in the
"new North" insures that research activity soon will increase.
Some of the infOrmation gained will ·eventually help the Department.
For example, the'nureau 'of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife should
soon have a Re;J:uge Manager and Assistant Refuge Manager for the
Arctic National Wildlife Range, who will help inventbry wildlife
chat area. ~e Bureau will survey waterfowl populations in
the Arctic and may do some research on polar bears. The University.
of Alaska. and qtherresearch institutions have proposed expanded
re·search ~n mari~e science and. in what can be termed "damage
ecology~' in terrestrial habitats. However, the onus of studying
game and fish populations' ~s largely on the Department of Fish
and Game.
A great deal Of good could come to the Department from the
we'w~il. learn a lot about the Arctic. Wecrisis in the
will have the experience of dealing with a capital-intensive,
.~
. .
3
\-;hen the oil industry moves into Bristol Bay, when the wood
products industl;'.y strides ·into the Interior, and when the
North American water and Power Alliance diverts the Yukon River.
W!e will have had 'a chance. t6, tc:ike part in regional land and
resource plannin~ ~n a sea never before a'ttempted in the :·-- .. · ', - '· . '
.United States. gerhaps'most important, we will have tested our
ability to s a Departmental unit in a situation demanding
the utmost in in~ividual. fort and group cooperation.
Aspects .of. the Department's Task
The impactiof petroleum development in the Arctic is a
Department concern, not a divisional one. No division•s program
can be effective... unless meshed with programs of other divisions
and coordinated at top Department levels. (For example, no change
in game harvest ~egulations will be meaningful unless information
a enforcement programs follow.) A brief survey is made here
of different facets of the task facing the Department of Fish .,,: i
and Game as a whole.
The dearth( of knowledge about .the Arctic demands that
research and inventoriesbe among th~ first responses to the
situation. (Throughout this report I wilJ,. refer to inventories
as distinct from ;research even though the difference may be
small especially:.in a "new" area. The basic implica on is that
an inventory is specific to a time and place; research is done
:r.n hope r ults will apply to other areas at other
times. An at.tenaant property of inventories is that they
' ' .
distribution of practically all gq,me and fish living in and
.· north of the Brooks Range. Each Division will establish priorities
so that limite¢! manpower and funds can be used on species most
likely to be ffected by industrial activity. ' .,,. ·,. '
Many wildlife species in the Arctic are familiar to biologists
from studies'dc,:>ne in oth7r parts of the State. Research in the
north will ma£:(lly describe how (or whether) arctic populations
differ in per-::-capita productivity, in behavior, or in major
mortality ctors~ Other research should identify habitats
that are critical to a species, in short supply, or liable to
damage during · · development. This would lead to another aspect
of research, tpe description of the nature and permanence of
damage done to water quality, spawning substrate, soil, or plant
communities. lthough other research institutes are usually
better able to conduct certain basic ecological research, their
studies rarelyare slanted toward the welfare of game or sport
fish. The Department will have to "fill the gaps" when managers
have to know more than research institutes can tell them.
One of the first goals of the research and inventory work
will be to idehtify particular areas that need special management
5
spots, areas ne scenery, caribou calving grounds,
fish spawning .areas, etc. These areas then can be proposed for
be given special status in future wildlife management programs
the Department.
the inventories.and research will be as bases for changing
harvest regulations. These may protect subsistence users in
some cases, or.emphasize trophy and recreational values in other
cases.
The Depa.itment now helps other agencies protect land surfaces, ",' ' . ' ' ' ' '
water quality, .~nd the environment as a whole. It does this mainly
through autho:ri.ty contained in the Anadromous Fish Act and
through agreements with the Department ~f Natural Resources
requiring seismic operators to get permits from the Department of
Fish and Game~. The specific authoti ty granted by the Act and
agreements probably is not sufficient to allow the Department
to discharge its general responsibility for protecting wildlife
and wildlife us.es. Specific solutions to this problem will have
to await decisions by the State Legislature and top State admin­
istrators as to· the relative importance inhering to fish and game
resources. The prospect, without such decision, is for patchwork
authority applied sporadically.
else\vhere. 'rhe main differences are that the suddenness of the
oblem demano::; intense and concerted efforts at solutions, and
t"ne situation has occurred at a time when citizens of Alaska and
·the Nation are clamoring for a broad, environment~conscious
approach to rna gement 'by all resource agencies. The wildlife
biologist cannot be satisfied simply to know that arctic animals
are not being overharvested.. His concern must include the '· - '
quality and pr¢ductivity of the whole environment.
El~ments of the Game Division Program
The Game:Division.will be involved in research, inventory,
surveillance of.. industry activities, defining specia 1 management . '
areas, issuingperm.its,.and information-education programs in
the Arctic. Before outlining specific jobs in detail,· a few
comments will ·made on priori ties., schedules, manpower, and
logis·i:ics.
funds or time are. limited.. My suggestions for priorities are
based on judgerrrents as to: 1) the probability of immediate change
in harvest or hgbitat; '.2) the relative abundance of an environmental
type,. habitat, or speci'es;. 3) our capability (including knowledge,
:..:ity, and technical and financic:tl ability) to prevent or
lossesr 4~ valu~ given the resource by the generalrn
public.
With thos~.factors in mind I suggest the following priori ­
ties and schedules:
management areas north of the Brooks Range and along
the proposed transportation and pipeline routes north
of Fc;tirbanks.! It requires taking full advantage.of •'' ' ,
past 'VIork in the region and continual, close liason·
with dther divisions and agencies with resource
manag-ement :responsibilities in the area.
l
or pipeline routes as soon as these are known,and in
the area of intense drilling and exploration. General
maps a;nd catalogues can be compiled beginning when
general routes are known; detailed work should follow
on the. heels of announcement of precise routes.
3. Continue and expand efforts to monitor human-induced
mortality and'habitat degradation: Top priority
should be given to obtaining facts on the harvest of
trophyspecies and carnivores. High priority shot+ld
be given surveillance of water pollution and other
habitat. degradation.
a) wolves f) sheep
b). grizzly bears ~) caribou
c) wolverines h) waterfowl
e) moose
5. In F'Y70 and FY71, begin research on key habitats in
areas on the fringe of present industrial development,
or where oil exp:).oration appears imminent.
6. R~search on~productivity and major mortality factors
0
ea~iy inventories.and "key habitats" research are
available.
Educational and' informational activities are highly
important, but, by nature, they are hard to plan and budget for
as discrete jo}Js. Certain aspects~-such as compiling and
ting a special set· of game and sport fishing regulations ·.i,. . .
ining to the Arctic--can be done on a schedule by particular
people. Most of the E and I work, however, will be accomplished
as Division per9onnel go about their other du·ties.
General Jl.spects of Funding, Manpower, and Logistics
Fundin_g_:' Extra monies, not budgeted for in FY69 or last
October (1968) will not be available for North Slope programs
the FY70. For the next year, therefore,
any additional work done in the Arctic probably means that less
work can be done elsewhere. Furthermore, arctic work eats up
travel, contractual, and equipment budgets very fast. Since the
' . .
heavy on personal services, whichever is preferred), the effect
of spending a qollar in the Arctic ··is somewhat greater than
expected at first glanc·e. This will be especially true in the
first year when'expenditures are high for housing, aircraft, and
equipment for North Slope activi tie's.
It hard.to predict what the funding situation may be
like in FY71 and beyond. ,There is a limit to the Division's
revenue from li¢ense sales and Federal Aid matchingmon s.
License revenues could be increased by raising fees for tags,
etc. Some increase ca~ be expected from a rise in license buyers,
especially nonresidents. There is also the chance that general
"··­
interest among Jegislatbrp in a 11 crash program" will be hard to
sustain very long.
September 1969 will be extremely important to
ObviOusly, the .kind of budget planning we are able to do
our arctic
The matter of manpower is also of concern.
The Division "has upwards of a dozen vacant Game Biologist posi­
tions which should be .filled in the near fu'ture. Since these
positions were justified and authorized before the current North
Slope furor ar~se, they clearly are meant to help solve other
critical shortco~ings Jn the Divisiion' s program. Few could be
re-routed tothe.Arctic. Thus, if Divisional activities in the
north demand additional people, new positions eventually will
have to be sou~ht.
Even if.new people were available, there would be a
i'rly lengthY' period of training necessary before they would
be able to worJ.c independently in the Arctic. This indicates
that 1) arctic;: work for the next 2 years .will have to be done ·~:-' 'i
by present personnel, especially those with previous arctic
ience, a,nO.. 2) every effort must be made during that time to
give arctic experience to as many Division employees as possible.
Lo..sr.i.§.tics: Themain factors in the logistics picture in
·the Arctic are ;the distance from presently staffed towns, the
weather, and the extensive use of aircraft.
11
The Department will establish permanent facilities,
P?rhaps in several loc~tions, for personnel working in the Arctic.
The Game Division has established a permanent Area Biologist
position in Barrow, scheduled to be fi'lled in September 1969.
Other locations (various staff members have mentioned Barter
Island, Bettles; Fort Yukon, Kotzebue, and Umiat) will be used
for e camps'.for field operations, and will need housing,
stor2"ge space, :a.n airstrip and aviation facilities, and good
radio equipment. All of this is very costly.
Fairbanks is the regional headquarters for the Arctic.
New positions for arctic activities: will require space·there,
arid supervisory, planning, ·and support staff will likewise need
more space. This lendseven greater urgency to the chronic
problem of office and laboratory space for Fairbanks-based staff.
The weather in t{le ;\rctic is, to put it mildly, different.
The seasonal dar.kness, cold, fog, and .wind (sometimes all four
combined) mean bigger margins needed for field time. Not only ,,, '
does it cost more per hour to operate north of the Brooks Range,
but it takes longer to get things done.
. '
Arctic must be done with aircraft, and research programs will
1
12
with this aircraft use, stemming from the scarcity of competent
and lling contract aircraft operaJcors, shortage of Department
p ots, and shortage of·. suitable Department aircraft with
a;_:Jpropriate radio equipment.
A short 'summary of game inventories and research already
accomplished in\the Arcticwill serve to introduce proposals
for new stud I compiled these :Statements from Department
reports or publication or obtained drafts especially for this
purpose from Gc:tme Biolo.gists familiar with the spec
Caribou
Skoog (1968. Ecology of Caribou in Alaska. Dept. Zoology,
u. Cal. at Berkeley. Ph.D. dissertation) recognized two caribou ,, ,- '
hc:;rds north o:f>.the. Arctic Circle in Alaska. One, the Porcupine
He , ranges from about Anaktuvuk I>ass east almost to the lower
MacKenzie River~ and between the shore of the Beaufort Sea and
the Porc.upine Riv.er valley. The other, called the Arctic Herd,
throughoutthe western half of the arctic plain, Brooks
Range, and (inwinter)
of the number of caribou in the
two herds were.rnade by 'skoog in 1961, when he put the Porcupine
Herd to 117,000 head, and 1964, when he estimated
13
300,000· the ·He thought the latter herd was
grow in 1 . This same suggestion was made in 1968 by James
Hentming and Leland Glenn.
Aerial counts ha~e been made to find calving grounds and
determine production. Calf-cow ratios from 41:100 ;to 73:100 have
bcen r,2corded in June (1960, 1961, 1962, 1968, 1969) for the
Arc-tic Herd, suggesting a lower average parturition rate for this
"chan for the Nelchina Herd south of the Alaska Range. Calf
counts will be made for Porcupine Herd in June 1969.
Harvest of the Arctic Herd occurs mostly in fall and spring,
south of the Brooks.Range. The annual kill usually is in the range·
20,000 30,000 caribou.
In 1963 Skoog irst saw large numbers of cows in the Arctic
Herd in June which had r_etained the placenta or showed signs of
hemorrhagic The percentage of cows with these symptoms .
was 19.7 in 196~ and 15 ·in 1964, but dropped to 0.5 to 2.6
per cent in 1966..,.,68. · In 967, 9. 5 per cent of 162 caribou examined
had positive reactions to a serum test for brucellosis. In 1968
5.3 per cent ofi71 animals had positive titres~ A high percent­
age of cows with.· retained placentae had lost their calves shortly
parturition. The overall significance of these disease
prob is not known. Skoog specula-ced that the incidence of
disease might.indicate. that the Arctic Herd is near a
numcri
14
cont expansion or maintenance of population of caribou)
h::1.v2 not made th~s hyJ:?6thesis more compelling.
Sheep oc::cur along the entire length of the Brooks Range.
They are generally more abu.ndant on the north side of the Range
t~an on the south, but they are or have been abundant on the
south side between the Alatna and Wind Rivers. Scott, Chatelain,
and Elkins estimated that the BrooksRange contained about half
of the she No recent estimates of numbers are
available.
From 196~ to ·1968, reported harvests of rams were: 1963,
178; 1964, 133; 5, 99; 1966, 133;· 1967, 105; 1968, 144. People
of Kaktovik on Barter Island harvest:about 50 sheep per year in
add ion to those report~d above. An unknown number of sheep is
taken by people of Anaktuvuk Pass and Kivalina.
There are :no reliable·guages of the productivity of Brooks
Range sheep. S~me datei available suggest that horn growth is
slower and the maximum age attainabl~ is greater in the Brooks , :.'.-_·,.··,·,, .
of.Alaska. ·Range than in other are
Goshawks, igeon hawks, sharp-shinned hawks, red-tailed
hawks (including Harlan's hawk), ospreys, and bald eagles reach
the nor·thern limit of their Alaskan range on the south side of ·the
gyrfalcon· and peregrine
Brooks Range .. Golden eagles are common in the Brooks Range.
Marsh Hawks aro widely .distributed in the Brooks Range and North
Slope, but are not co~uon Rough-legged hawks, gyrfalcons, and
pere ine ·are the most common arctic raptors in Alaska.
•rrre are of special interest because of
their current worldwide status, and because they are subject to
harvest by falconers to the extent that local populations can
quickly be placed in jeopardy.
Cade' s l,ong. paper (1960. Peregrine and gyrfalcon popu­
lations in Alaska. Univ.. of Cal. Publ. Zoology) is the best
single source o information about Alaskan arctic falcons. Cade
estimated that .to 150 pairs of peregrines breed in the Colville
H.ange as a whole~ did not· make similar estimates for gyrfalcons
because his dat·a were less reliable, but simply said there were
::ewer gyrfalcon~ than peregrines in the Arctic of Alaska, probably ,
fewer than 75 pairs in total in andnorth of the Brooks Range. ' ','
Cade hasmade several trips to the Arctic since the publi­
cation of his monograph, and has obtained information on productiv~ty ..• I. .
·and nesting den~ities each time, particularly along the Colville.
These data, still largely unpublished, would be available to the
Departmen·c to he.lp in management programs.
1
,,' /
of animals turned in to the Department for bounty certification.
The contacts with hunters allowed some inferences to be made
about :::-elative numbers of wolves in different years, and about
pack size. Carc.a"sses yielded data on age, sex, and total number
of an
Wolves apparently were shot in such large numbers in the
la 1950 •s and early 1960 ·• s (or natural mortality was so high)
populations.of this·species decreased to low levels in the
Arc in 1960 and 1961. The wolves became more abundant in
the· period 1964-1967, possibly due to. partial protection afforded
by Jcwo-wolf bag limits on aircr hunters. Illegal harvests
were severe in 1968 and 1969, and wolves may again be quite scarce
on the North Slope.
arctic wolverines is available. Distribution records are
frag>:nentary, but indicate that the species is found throughout
the Brooks Range and North Slope.
Waterfowl
A 4-day flight in.mid-summer 1966 by James King, Bureau '•,, .
of Sport Pisheri~$ and Wildlife, provided our best knowledge
about goose and swan populations on the North Slope. King saw
6,730 white-fronted geese, and 458 snow geese on this survey.
The only area o~ waterfowl concentration located was from
Teshekpuk Lake .to Cape Halkett, midway between Barrow and the
Colville River delta. Many of the geese in this area were non­
ing, molti;ng birds. Aside from this and possibly a few
other concentration area,.s, waterfowl occur scatteringly over the
entire vast plain of the North Slope, usually.in decreasing
dens ies away from the ocean.
By implication, therefore,· one can assume that anything
short of massiv~, widespread habitat des.truction would have
relatively little effect on arctic waterfowl on theirbreeding
grounds. •rhe exceptions (and these may be very important) are
the few areas where molting geese and other waterfowl concentrate
midsumn1er.
nor their migra1:ory paths and wintering grounds, are known.
Moose
We have pp.ly very limited knowledge of moose north of the
Brooks Range. They· seem. to occur or: all major drainages from "·,·~;·
Meade River (SSv{ of Barrow) eastward, with the best-known being
those on the middle Colville River area. There are no quantitative
data on numbers\ productivity, or harvest (the latter because some
moose are -caken by residents who do not report their kill.)
the colville River area ~s planned for mid-An acr·ial
A recentNay 1 9. report by a native of Anaktuvuk Pass indica·tes
that heavy browsing pressure may have occurred along the Anaktuvuk
Seventy-seven moose
wereseen along the river by Department
biologists on a courit in'M.ay 1969.
Mar Mammals
sea , belug·a, bowhead whales all occur in waters adjacent
to the North Slope. Bearded and ringed seals are year round
residents as long as ice. is present.·· Walrus are present when
the ~s moving out or> in, usually late July to early September.
Spotted seals, not numerous north of Wainwright, are summer visitors_
to river mouths ;;tnd bays. Ribbon seals are infrequent visitors.
Bowhe whales·occur in deep waters except when ice is present,
and are summer visitors to the Arctic Ocean and Beaufort.Sea.
Belugas are prese:nt in the Arctic in summer only~ they are found
in shallow water. areas.
grow. A les r.roportion of primary production occurs in bottom
and mid-waters. drifting contaminant, therefore, such as oil,
could destroy much of·this primary source of biologic productivity.
of food supplie~.
Bears
these
19
Subs2quent effec·ts on n\arine mammals could occur through reduction
and are in great demand for trophies among hunters. Relative to
anin1als at lower trophic. levels the bears are scarce and have low
yearly recruitment to the population. Arctic grizzlies may be
thornier management problems than polar bears because. a) they
are less numerous and (perhaps) less abundant per unit area, b)
they are more subject.to 11 Casual 11 or haphazard hunting as people
s them in their (the humans') routine work or travel, c)
international attention ensures th21:t, at the very least, the
mismanagement of ~olar~ears will not go unnoticed, Arctic
grizzlies have not gained tha'j: much interest.
Grizzly bears occur·across the entire North Slope and
probably are more abundant in theupper parts of arctic-flowing
rivers than in ~he coas:tal plains. We lack specific information
on phase of the.life or numbers of arctic grizzlies. Dr.
Rober"c Rausch, Zoonotic Disease Section, Arctic Health Research
Center, has a collection of skulls Of grizzlies taken over many
years in and around Anaktuvuk Pass. This collection is.the only
one available for study.of the age structure of northern grizzly
populations in Alaska.
den, ·the major management concerns· are to keep the harvest in
proper relation to the supply, and to maintain the produc·tivity
of marine ice-pack habitat of the species. The new industrial
activity in the North may significantly affect both of those
aspects by increasing the harvest and reducing productivity through ,_:
oil spills, etc.
Forty-e~ght musk.,...oxen were moved this spring from Nunivak
Island Nation~l Wildlife Refuge to Barter Island in the Arctic
National Wildl~fe Range.; Hopefully this group will increase and
re-populate at least ·small portion of the Alaskan Arct , from
which spE;!c:i,:es was exterminated in the 19th century. Division
biologists will, be checking on the. welfare of these animals closely
in the next few years. One or more add ional transplants from
Nunivak to the Arctic may be made.
Activities Proposed for FY1970
By reducing the Division contingency fund, the Director
. -, . ' .
the following section could be done within this upper limit.
21
a:ce ludcd in the budgeted $50,000. The'extensive polar bear
carch conducted in the Arctic Ocean in FY70, which would
cost approximate;ly $25. 1 0QO, is not included because this work is
not really a resl?onse t new needs arising from industrial
activity. The second tr,ansplant of musk oxen to the Arctic
National Wildlife Range, planned foi March 1970, will be budgeted
out of Region IIJ; management funds. ·. No personal services costs
(line item 100 in the statebudget system) are included, as no
extra staff is being added to do thework. Surveillance of
indus}:ry operaticms, carried on by the Division • s Lands section,
are not budgeted for. Finally, in .late June 1969 the Division . . .
obtained approvalto use FY69 funds,.which otherwise would have
reverted to the ~ederal Government, to purchase atrailer unit
($25,000) and aircraft ($70,000) for North Slope work. These items
greatly reduce costs incurred in FY70.)
Surveys and ·research proposals submitted by Division staff
members included .studies of caribou, ·grizzly bear, moose, musk ox,
sheep, waterfowl;. and wolves and wolverines~ The proposals are
summarized in Table 1. The total cost of the work, slightly over
$37,000, is mainlyfor aircraft charter and per diem. A list of
other equipment and materials needed.to establish a field base
camp is in Table 2. These items must be bought with FY70 funds.
field base camp, ~Yl970.
Storage tank (1~000 gallon) for aviation gasoline, with stand and flow meter
Generator, diesel, 3 KW, ·. 110-220 volt
~adio, 100 watt VHF transmitter-receiver
Water pump, jet
Materials for 12~ x 12 1 plywood uninsulated storage shed
Miscellaneous hardware, equipment, supplies
Total
~/)
The ·on.ly research proposal submitted was for a study of the
'1..:8 ss of ial photos for censusing arctic caribou. This
s would begin with an extensive reconnaissance flight. in a
fixed-wing airsraft to locate the entire female segment of the
\""estern arctic/ caribou herd at calving time. Major groups would
then be photographed after calving; had taken place and 1 females
peripheral areas co.unted with helicopter. Herd composition
a calving ~nd again during the fall rut would be determined
from ground counts •. Only the reconna sance flight, scheduled for
June 1970, ar~ funded in the FY70 budget: 1
Grizzly,bear surveys are being scheduled for April-June 1970 ,l ,;
to begin systE~maticaliy recording the distribution of the species
in the Arctic and to s · if track·counts ip spring will indicate
the abundance of bears •
.The modsei' surveys also are· intended to improve our knowledge
of where moose live on the North Slope, what their relative
abundance is in different river drainages, and how well they are
faring (as determined by various aerial herd composition surveys) .
·Some of this work will he attempted in fall, but most will be done
the better,weatherduring March-May. '' ' ''t '
Short'surveys are needed approximately five times during
FY70 to watch' the. survival and movemen·ts of musk oxen brought to
Bart:er Island, Arctic Wildli Range, in March 1969. These surveys
will help determine where (or whether) additional transplants might
be successfuL .
to cover the area between ·the
F.. i}x!,)n and A·ti9un rivers, will provide baselines of information
on herd compos on and numbers for fu·ture comparisons. It will
also improve our sketchy knowledge Of sheep distribution in that
area. The surveys will be done in July 1969.
As was mentioned earlier, there a good chance that
wolves are relatively scarce at present on the North Slope, due
mosJcly to (and illegal) hunting by people using aircraft.
•ro confirm isprove. this, and to establish a baseline population
estimate and wolverines east of the ColvilleRiver,
extensive spr aerial surveys are proposed for FY70. Technique~
used successfully in the Nelchina B in to estimate wolf abundance
ect sightings and .track tall will be used in the Arctic.
A biometrician \vill be employed as a consultant to help set up
the survey pattern and intensity of effort.
It is proposed that 5-day aerial survey of waterfowl
inJuly 1969 in the coastal areas from Barrowpopulations
t.o Camden Bay.C The aim of this survey is to confirm the high use
of certain lakes by.molting wa·terfowl, reported by King in 1966,
and to obtain current information .• on the distribution of black
branJc and other geese .in the Arctic.
The question of effects of tracked vehicles on tundra
veg-e'cation directly pertinent to game pro9rams in the Arctic.
26
t.he Department of Fish Ga.me does not have plant
available to study ·this problem, o·ther state insti­
~tu do. would seem logical and appropriate for the
D ion of Game to suppor·t, or help to support, research on
ccology.11 I propose tha·t the Division set aside $2,000
:~Y70 to aid. this type of research effort by competent
ecologists. on·e worthwhile project was· begun in FY69 by the
Departmentof Biological Sciences of the University of Alaska, ' .
~mdcr tho direction of Dr. Bonita Neiland. A copy of ·their
research proposal is appended to this report. Our support of this
s in the sUmmer o 1970 could be crucial to the success of the
As indicated earlier in this report, the identification of
areas in. the North tha~ need special management policies and
techniques because of their exceptional value for wildlife,- ,.,: ·.
::.::s ic or scie.:n,tific uses, should receive high priority. The
Bureau of Land ~anagement, the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife, and the Alaska Department of Natural Resources have
primary responsi}:)ility to do this work {except for strictly
wi aspects) .in the.Brooks Range and Arctic. However, they
l
·,
interested this kind of work. The Game Divis ion can provide
significant assistance to these agencies, even with a limited
lable. This can be done by
1) Ass ing one s·taff member the responsibility to meet
staff of other agencies to find out how our programs
and data can be geared to effective participation in
landc.lassification and managementi
exact type of information they can get to help identify
special management areas;
4) Following through, with other agencies, to see that
land planning incorporates the recommendations made.
At present, I suggest that the basic field data be gathered
w£-.ile biologists are performing surveys or research. No additional
funds need to be sought .in 0 for ,this purpose.
Suggesti'ons for Studies in FY71
The initial inventory of major game species in the Arctic
canno"c be fini · in 1969-.70. Most of the FY70 surveys will
be done in the a~ea most affected by current petroleum development
activities. There will be a need to. expand the inventory work
we into Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 4, and eastward into
".:he Arc·tic Wildlife Range, in FY71 and later. The level of effort
probably will be approximately the same in FY71 as FY70; that
about 400 hours of. flying time.
The caribou census research job will continue through FY7l.
No cost estimate is now available, bu·t this will be a high-cost
ject if extensive helicopter charter is required.
The Division should again consider funding ecological
ies of damage to tundra by tracked vehicles, at a cost of
$4,000 in FY71
An inventory of raptor populations (peregrine and gyrfalcons)
should be started in the Arctic in July 1971. Initial reports
suggest that more raptors breed west than east of the Colville,
so that aerial flights and ground work should begin in the western
Arctic. Survey.S.would be possible throughout July. The job would
require a pilotr Supercub, and observer for one month, and would
cost about $5,000.
By FY71. it should be possible to begin studies of the
produc·tivity of!arctic game. populations. Reconnaissance work
in 1969-70 should.have indicated suitable study areas for two
c s, Dall sbeep and moose. Intemsively....worked study areas
are of li·ttle yalue for determining productivity of the carnivores
(bea::::-, wolf, wolverine); data on those species probably must be
obtained by exte:psive aerial observations coupled with examinations·
of animals. shot by hunters or collected by biologists.
I. Int1~oduc tio.rx
tho Effects of Tr~cked Vehicle travel on Arcti~
'r'undr<it Voget;,~.tion
Jerome B. Hok, Graduate Student Department of Biologic~l Sciences Univer8ity of Al~ska College, Alaska
the di~covery ot vast reserves of oil beneath the north slope
o::: -cho Brool;;s H:mge, we have c:::nbarkad upon a period of extensive develop-
all ~uancr of
Transport~tion is a key problem in this development, and
machines have been tried for surface travel thr0ush the
roadless ~reas of the North. Anyone who has flown over some p~rt
of th.::: .'i.rc tic for .the fir.;:;t tirne returns amazed at the number of tri.:lcks'
and 'crail.::.:; that are visible on the tundru below. The occasionul ructias·
train'.' in a military scrap yard gives testiL'lon~·
have. gone to in an. effort to haul ca~go v1here there .
Often it can-be predicted whether or not a given machine can traverse
2articular te~rain, but far fewer positive statements can be made as to
what lonJ-ranga~effect the p~ssage ·or that machine will have on the land
over which it has traveled. . For exam1He, while it might be possible for
tracked vehiciJs to oper-ate extensively on such cor:mmni ties ;;o.s the Dryas
fell-fields, a p{ngle pass up the slope of a ridged wet meadow could
possibly upcet a delicate drainage a11d .insulation balance and even t.ually
res'J.lt in highl.y altered ,ph;yc;ical and'biological conditivns. Canadian
hi,;h·.;ay re~.>arch has produced a co~;.siderable body of information concernins
the ~~ysical properti~s of arctic tundra with reference to road construc­
tion but in th.ese studies vegetation :per ~is only a peri..9heral topic.
Y;;;t wl:ile the.::ce exist no .;;;ystematic dcita on the recovery of arctic
~;unci:'a v:.::.::;eta tio,11. from such 1 disturb;.;;nc es, our' bases fo.r selecting be tween
alte:n1ative routes and methods are incom1)lete. Now that the use of
t d v~hicles,in the.A;laskan north is ragidly increasing, there is an
i:r.:.wO.ic.:.te no;;:ed .t(l provide answers to t!_Uestions about these machines a:-:.d
~n~ir effects on the ~nvironment.
to
11 overland
I:~. ;_:.n effort toward fi~li11_;; this sap in our knov;led;_:;e, I propose a
h.:;t·v.e -t}l-rc e-- ·~)'r.J_nt(\l~~{ ;_E-9alS.
-'-·., ·· 'l'h;;; obta:L1U..n,; of _p.relir;lin.:.;.ry observations at a broad scale on the
recovcr•y of Ala::;lkan tundra ve,;-e ta tion on tracked' vehicle trail:.;;
of lc10wn history.
2. A lite~~t~re search and compilation of a bibliogra;hy of studies
on this subject--to include road-en.;ineering research insofar as it
contains known effects on comparable vegetation types in areas of.
continupus permafrost.
3. Developm~nt of working hypothese~ about the effects of vehicles
on this vc;etc, tion, and for.rrmldtion of a research prosr.:.:.m to inten­
sively study specific aspects of the problem.
The rcconm.l..issance proposed anc:, the one-year t:J.ore intensive study
t will be. baaed on the results .of it will constitute thesis research
±'or the 11'. s.•. de~re.:; in 1 Biology~ Univercity of Alaska 1 a11d will be under
of Dr. Boni~a J. Neiland, Associate Professor .of
Botany 1 Depa~tment of Biological Sciences, University of Alaska.
Work for·the sunlraer vf 1969 >7ould be divided into tv:o rilajor as2.;:cts:
Bac~~round reseu~ch and field investication.
A* Background. research.: the primar;y gval of my background research would .
be the ~;;electioJl of trails ~
fr.tr subsequent field investigation. Sites
would be c'hosen on .the ba;:;es of· completeness of known history and ·
potc:rl tial pon t.ribu.tion to p:covidin6 a systematic array of terrains·
and levels of disturbance. Obviously, the needed information is not
available ;f.com any .single source. Old mining recor·ds ~ geologic.sd sur­
vey repor-c.:;, re::.>earch pubficat.ions, and popular magazine articli:ls are
among the ~~ri tten records which are available, and often valuable . in!ormati6n can be obtained from individuals who ar~ familiar with a
particulararea. To illustrate the varied nature of the infor~atibn
sou1:ce.s which can be ta,pped to provide back:;round for this study~
I can li::; t the references which have been used to cla te in co!npiling
_nformation for the Seward Paninsula:
1. 1-:ineral Ind.u.;;try Research Lab. Re..._oort j)l8, Univ. of ..:;.laska. 2. ?reject C~ariot R~ports on vegetational studies~ . ... E. C. and
Univ. of .:...la;.;;~·:a. · 3. The Lom2.1.ns Cou.uner•cial Co. map of roads and trails.
... A Biblio,:srtt_phy of Alo.okan Litur.::ttu:cc. Vlickershc::.m. Arctic Anthropolo::;y 2,. i/-2. Personal c Ol!!Jaunica tions.
Most of the above 0ritten records have su~gested further sources of
information which can be chack·Jd.
Such a sca.rch of old and recent records i.s time consumin.;\ yet it
felt that a field investigation of disturbed tundra can only be
raeaningftA.l when the hi.::;tory of the .disturbance is re~.sonably well
kno•,vn. The ore, it is esth:atecl that approxiillately the first month
of the:; surruiwr season (June) should be spent in docurnent.ing .trails
~nd in compiling a ~uitable array of trails to be visited during the
field phase of this survey.
B. :-r--ield Investisation: The. objectives of the field phase of this study
would be:
1. To provide an organized body of information at a broad scale
on the major changes in tundra coro..cuuni ties which result from.
disturbance by tracked vehicles, and
2. To obtain ~nformation essential for formulation of specific
research plans.
In order to gain a broad persp~ctive of a widespread~enonenon in.
which wOJ.ny·variab.les a1.~e operative, ideally, one should investi.:_!;a~e
the largest possible.nuraber of trails whose histories and locations ; ';
provide a'ful1 array of use levels and environments. It is in tended.
that a re::;ister of potentially valuable trails in what prove to be ' the mo;ct: nsitive ve,;;etc.:tion tj'l)B$ will be compiled :frout all a.l·~as''
of Alask~1.$ arcitic; these trail~ cou~d then be visited in such '· ',. . '
sec..uence a.nd compl8teness as time' available transpor·tation, funds t
and developments in.the field indicate. Aerial reconnaissance and
ground observation wo~ld us in sucli combinatioil as seeued
warrantcd~by ~ield results. Broa.d patterns would be noced from
the air, v1hile cias liDts, estimates of relat;ve s~ecies im­
portance and sensitivity, cha.n;;es ;;.n surface level, soil exposure,
dr&ina:y chatl_;es, and stimulati·:m of frost activity are a::nong the
factor~ which wo11ld be under consideration durin;; ground observation.
Duri the academic year, 1969-?0l data collected durin:.; the sw::l::lc-r
w::ll be a.nulyz.::d a!i.d evaJ.u::;.tecl. ?,ro:~t tl-tis ~nformation:
1. lon3-ranse comprehan8ive research plans that would m~~t efficiently
provide needed informa t.io.1 ou,major aspects o.f the problem will
1
,. ted c :Lc portiu;l of these will be pl~.:umed. ir1 d.,;:;
.. for work dur_~~ 1970-71. Restriction in scope will a
:c>ti;:sa tion a.nd prolntb:lj involve worl<;: in a limi t(:;:cl area ou
~he· mou't sensitive ·ve~etati.on type.
.A proposal for support r this project will be develop~d
submit to· apfJropriate agenc
t). Of f-l,
0'-f'f, {3i;,t ,S.t.-(U;,cr:.-s­
Introduction
Elements of the Game Division Program
Priorities and General Schedules
Manpower
Logistics
Caribou
Sheep
Raptors
Wolves
Wolverine
Waterfowl
Moose
TABLES
Table 1. Summary of surveys amd research proposed, FY70, North Slope.
Table 2. Equipment, materials, and supplies needed for a field base camp, FY1970.
A Proposal for support for A Reconnaissance of the Effects of Tracked Vechicle Traffic on Arctic Tundra Vegetation
Introduction