Jennifer Reed - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
•Télécharger en tant que PPT, PDF•
1 j'aime•613 vues
Jennifer Reed Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Exit Strategies Conference 2010 Sustainable Summits Initiative
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Similaire à Jennifer Reed - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Similaire à Jennifer Reed - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (20)
Plus de Sustainable Summits Initiative
Plus de Sustainable Summits Initiative (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Jennifer Reed - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
- 1. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge All Photos USFWS unless otherwise noted
- 2. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge Arctic National Wildlife RefugeArctic National Wildlife Refuge Jennifer Reed, Visitor Services CoordinatorJennifer Reed, Visitor Services Coordinator Arctic NationalArctic National Wildlife RefugeWildlife Refuge Exploring Remote RiverExploring Remote River Waste ManagementWaste Management
- 3. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge
- 4. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge National Wildlife Refuge System – AlaskaNational Wildlife Refuge System – Alaska 16 AK Refuges16 AK Refuges >76 million acres>76 million acres 83% of the Refuge System83% of the Refuge System 18% of Alaska’s land mass18% of Alaska’s land mass
- 5. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge Douglas Yates Photo credit: Douglas Yates
- 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge Public Land Order 2214Public Land Order 2214 December 6, 1960December 6, 1960 The Arctic National Wildlife Range was established forThe Arctic National Wildlife Range was established for “the purpose“the purpose of preserving unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreation values.”of preserving unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreation values.”
- 7. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge The Wilderness Act of 1964The Wilderness Act of 1964
- 8. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge Allow airplane accessAllow airplane access in Wilderness, within Wilderness, with some exceptionssome exceptions ANILCA, Alaska’s Lands Act of 1980ANILCA, Alaska’s Lands Act of 1980 Alaska Wilderness Refuges will:Alaska Wilderness Refuges will:
- 9. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge National Wildlife Refuge SystemNational Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997Improvement Act of 1997 • HuntingHunting • FishingFishing • Wildlife observationWildlife observation • Wildlife photographyWildlife photography • InterpretationInterpretation • Environmental educationEnvironmental education Six Priority Wildlife-dependent Public Uses:Six Priority Wildlife-dependent Public Uses:
- 10. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge Commercial Service ProvidersCommercial Service Providers
- 11. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge
- 12. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge Seeking CooperationSeeking Cooperation
- 13. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge But wait, is there really a problem?But wait, is there really a problem?
- 14. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge But wait, is there really a problem?But wait, is there really a problem? And if so, who should be solving it?And if so, who should be solving it?
- 15. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge RefugeRefuge VisitationVisitation •Visitor use is concentrated: few rivers, short seasonVisitor use is concentrated: few rivers, short season •Kongakut: > 20% of all visitors in < 30 daysKongakut: > 20% of all visitors in < 30 days •Complaints: more than 35 people at put-in for daysComplaints: more than 35 people at put-in for days •Is this superlative Wilderness?Is this superlative Wilderness?
- 16. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge Solutions?Solutions?
- 17. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge •Huge, wild, and remote; but visitation concentrated spatially, temporallyHuge, wild, and remote; but visitation concentrated spatially, temporally •Relative visitation low; but arctic environment has lower thresholdRelative visitation low; but arctic environment has lower threshold •HW Concentrations resolved with facilities; but not appropriate hereHW Concentrations resolved with facilities; but not appropriate here •Opportunities for extreme freedom; but with minimal regulation/education,Opportunities for extreme freedom; but with minimal regulation/education, heavy burden of individual responsibilityheavy burden of individual responsibility •Remote logistics appear simple; but complicated by complex social dynamicsRemote logistics appear simple; but complicated by complex social dynamics ContradictionsContradictions
- 18. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge
- 19. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge
Notes de l'éditeur
- Thank Roger and AAC Before we can delve into the topic at hand, it’s important to set the context for Arctic Refuge’s unique situation.
- Refuges are the land and water base for accomplishing the Service mission of Working with partners to conserve fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats for present and future generations. Today, there’s a diverse network of protected lands called the National Wildlife Refuge System which includes more than 545 refuges and encompasses more than 92 million acres.
- Alaska Refuges comprise approx 83% of the National Refuge system’s land and water base. Arctic NWR is Alaska’s Wilderness Refuge: a little over 19 million acres, it is headquartered out of our Fairbanks, AK office (over 250 miles from the Refuge boundary), and has about 8 million acres of Wilderness. Arctic Refuge has no roads, trails, or facilities within its boundary.
- Though the Refuge remains largely unaltered, there is a human story to be told here. It is the homeland of Inupiat Eskimos of the North Slope and Gwich&apos;in Athabascan Indians of the Interior. More recently Arctic Refuge is a premiere boating, hunting, and wildlife observation destination within Alaska. And three major laws affect how public use occurs in Alaska and Arctic NWR.
- Refuge created in 1960—purpose of preserving the area’s unique wildlife, wilderness, and recreational values. Even before the Wilderness Act, the Refuge was rooted in Wilderness values.
- Now Refuge visitors come with high expectations for a quality wilderness experience in this vast, remote area. Managers resist implementing a direct visitor registration system to preserve the unique freedom from launch dates, campsite assignments, or registration requirements that has been available here. Consequences: The vast majority of Refuge visitors do not encounter any staff prior to their visit,. Refuge has no direct way to educate about our management goals or enlist their stewardship.
- ANILCA profound conservation law, still being interpreted in the courts. Affects public use of Alaska Refuges in many ways. Allows unlimited access via airplanes even in W Consequence: Refuge staff is not able to conclusively document total Refuge visitation, nor know from where its visitors originate, since access points are unlimited. ON the other hand…
- The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, our “organic” legislation: Prioritized 6 wildlife dependent public uses of the refuge system. Tells us to facilitate these uses, when possible, and not allow other uses if they would detract from our primary focus. And ….
- …..delegates authority to Refuges to regulate commercial visitor services through Special Conditions. Permittee reports provide visitor use information, such as distribution patterns, peak visitation dates, and group sizes. These reports remain the most accurate source of information for quantifying known visitation at Arctic Refuge. About half the commercially-supported use is guided About 1000 commercially-supported visitors are reported each year
- Compared with other recreational land managers, Refuges have very little visitor services infrastructure (staff, facilities). Alaska’s NWRs seek a wide range of partnerships to make quality visitor services available to the public. For the most part, our permittees seek out ways to advance stewardship of the Refuge, but Refuge partnering, education and enforcement resources are low (one full time visitor services ranger (me!) and one full time LE officer promote stewardship over 19 million acres with about 50 permittees and their approximately 1,500 clients).
- Permittees are required to avoid conflicts with other users to the best of their ability. Sometimes cross-cultural misunderstandings and rumors fuel user conflicts. I work hard in neighboring communities of Kaktovik and Arctic Village to promote emphasis on shared goals and mutual understanding between permittees and residents.
- Okay, so you have the context, but is there a HW problem at Arctic Refuge?
- Well, I’m here to ground-truth the issue with the experts!
- The Arctic has a brief summer season when rivers are typically floated, and five Refuge rivers receive about 60% of the total annual visitation. Caribou Pass on the Lower Kongakut is probably the most visited wildlife viewing site on the Refuge, and draws people to witness the migration of the Porcupine caribou herd through the area in spring. This graph depicts visitation on the Kongakut March 1—Sept 1. You can see two spikes in use: the first, a two-week concentration during the caribou migration, and the second, a lesser three-week concentration during sheep hunting season, which is even more spatially concentrated to the river’s mountainous headwaters. (Avg. 240 visitors/year on Kong) This concentrated use mostly occurs upon rocky cobble with no organic matter, or a fragile vegetation-type, with a very shallow organic soil mat of 1 to 6”. So yes, we believe there is a problem. I have seen the problem. The public has complained that there is a problem….
- But is it a human waste problem? It cannot be resolved entirely as a spatial distribution problem. Debate rages on about the best approaches for dealing with human waste in the context of Arctic Refuge. Education campaign needed once “best practices” are determined Guides interested in hauling out human waste to communities in the region have come up against opposition from some air operators. Villagers don’t want their homes to be “dumping grounds” for what they perceive to be wealthy visitors.
- Requirements for PETT Toilets during peak use times? Let client advocacy pressure air operators into offer the service? Help gateway communities see the opportunity for profit?
- Thank you for your attention and interest. I look forward to your perspectives.