U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Inventory and Monitoring
on
National Wildlife Refuges, Alaska
Danielle Jerry, USFWS-AK
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
• 16 refuges -- acres tripled by
ANILCA in 1980
• Over 76 million acres
(82% NWRS; ~ 20% of AK)
• 18.5 million acres of Wilderness
in 10 Alaska Refuges
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
ANILCA’s Common
Purposes - Alaska Refuges
“(i)
(ii)
Conserve fish and wildlife populations
and habitats in their natural diversity…;
Fulfill the international treaty obligations ... with
respect to fish and wildlife and their habitats;
(iii) Provide … consistent with the purposes…
(i) and (ii), the opportunity of continued
subsistence uses by local residents;
(iv) Ensure water quality and necessary water
quantity within the refuge.”
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
The National Wildlife Refuge
Improvement Act, 1997
“In administering the System, the Secretary shall –
“B) Ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health of the System are maintained …”
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Alaska Refuge Statistics
• 14 Field Headquarters, 6 HQ are road accessible;
but only 2 Refuges actually on road system.
• Tetlin (700k acres) to Yukon Delta (20 million
acres)
• 81 villages within refuges; 16 million acres of
inholdings.
• $32 million 2008 budget
• 227 FTEs in field; 52 in Regional Office
• ~ 60 biologists/biotechs: ranges from 1 on
Izembek and Innoko to 10 on Alaska Maritime
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Refuge management
needs for biological data
¾ Subsistence harvest,
including AMBCC.
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
¾ Predator control
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
¾ State infrastructure
development – including
inholders
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
¾ Climate change related issues
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Endangered Species Act
• Refuge management in AK now includes the Endangered
Species Act as listings of northern species increase and causes
of decline obscure
1988
Aleutian Shield Fern (endangered)
Naturally restricted
range
1990
Steller’s Sea Lion (endangered)
Causes unclear
1993
Spectacled Eider (threatened)
Causes unclear
2004
Yellow-billed Loon (proposed for
listing)
Causes unclear
2004
Kittzlitz Murrelet (candidate)
Shrinking tidewater
glacier habitat
2005
Polar Bear (proposed for listing)
Retreat of sea ice
2006
Northern Sea Otter (endangered)
Causes unclear
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Refuge management needs for
biological data, continued
• International issues – as a
protected area network, NWRSR7 is more similar to other
circumpolar protected areas than
to contiguous US refuges.
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Regional biological program
•
1981 to 1987 – CCPs, first landcover mapping of refuges.
•
1981 – 2000 – Refuge staffs grow. One region wide refuge
biologist meeting. Various efforts to coordinate and standardize
survey methodology for moose, waterfowl etc.
•
2001 – Regional Refuge Biologist hired in the RO
•
2002 – Division of Natural Resources created – botanist, RRB,
and first refuge biometrician. Also fire management program.
•
Started biological review program on refuges, refuge biologists
meetings
•
2006 – Downsizing creates Division of Realty and Natural
Resources (RNR)
• RRB, Botanist, Biometrician
• Water Resources Branch
• Realty Operations Branch
• Mapping Sciences Branch (mostly land status information)
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Realty and Natural Resources
biological program goals
¾Improve science on refuges.
¾Develop regional approach to regional issues.
¾Oversight and guidance
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
2004 Survey of Surveys
¾
300 + surveys
¾
12 - 44 ongoing surveys/refuge
¾
Lacked consistency among refuges
¾
Regional emphasis missing –
projects either site specific or
species specific, but lacking
regional approach.
¾
Data analysis and statistical
support huge issue.
¾
Projects not completed, i.e., data
analysis with report often not
completed.
¾
Various levels of peer review
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Regional approach to regional issues
•
Develop standardized template for refuge I & M
Plan and study protocols.
•
Refuges now required to develop and operate
under I & M Plan approved by Refuge Chief.
•
Biological Review by outside scientists and
managers for each refuge - goal to develop I & M
priorities in context of individual refuge budget
and staff.
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Regional approach to regional
issues, continued
¾
Developing regional database on refuge surveys.
¾
Regional I & M plan to establish regional approach
on a couple of key issues, e.g., climate change,
biodiversity.
¾
Partnering with Alaska Science Center to improve
I & M plans on refuges, identify key questions to be
addressed on regional scale and existing
monitoring networks available for refuges to join.
Eric Beever, PI for USGS.
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
As Refuges reassess their I & M programs, the
Region must also decide if we should be doing
some truly regional surveys.
¾Biodiversity inventories
¾Alaska Landbird Monitoring
System
¾Climate monitoring – geophysical
parameters, as well as biological
related issues.
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Water Resources Challenges
• Absence of baseline
hydrologic data
• Climate change is having
major impacts on hydrology,
but we lack specificity.
• Integrating science,
management and law of water
resources to ensure refuge
needs are protected
National Wildlife Refuge System
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
National Wildlife Refuge System