ii 

This page intentionally left blank. 

This page intentionally left blank. 
Kenai 

National Wildlife Refuge 

Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area 

Revised Final Management Plan 

May 2007 

Prepared by 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Kenai National Wildlife Refuge U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

2139 Ski Hill Road Division of Conservation Planning & Policy 

P.O. Box 2139 1011 East Tudor Road 

Soldotna, Alaska 99669-2139 Anchorage, Alaska 99503-6199 
ii 

This page intentionally left blank. 
Table of Contents 

Chapter 1: Introduction 

1.1 Purpose for Action ................................................................................................................... 1 

1.2 Background.............................................................................................................................. 1 

1.3 Public Involvement .................................................................................................................. 3 

1.4 Decision ................................................................................................................................... 5

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions 

2.1 Physical Environment .............................................................................................................. 6 

2.1.1 Landforms..................................................................................................................... 6 

2.1.2 Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 6 

2.1.3 Geology and Soils......................................................................................................... 6 

2.1.4 Water Resources ........................................................................................................... 6 

2.2 Biological Environment........................................................................................................... 8 

2.2.1 Vegetation..................................................................................................................... 8 

2.2.2 Wildlife ....................................................................................................................... 16 

2.3 Human Environment.............................................................................................................. 26 

2.3.1 Brief History of the Area ............................................................................................ 26 

2.3.2 Local Population ......................................................................................................... 27 

2.3.3 Summary of Current Use ............................................................................................ 27 

2.3.4 Public Use Access....................................................................................................... 28 

2.3.5 Public Uses and Related Facilities.............................................................................. 30 

2.3.6 Significant Concerns................................................................................................... 42 

Chapter 3: Management Direction 

3.1 Management Direction........................................................................................................... 43 

3.2 Coordination with the State Of Alaska .................................................................................. 51 

Chapter 4: Implementation .......................................................................................................... 52

Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 59

Appendix A: Decision Notice (original)

Appendix B: Decision Notice (amended) 

Appendix C: Alaska Board of Game Regulatory Proposal

Appendix D: Alaska Board of Game Emergency Regulations 

Appendix E: List of Preparers
ii 

List of Tables 

Table 2.1: Lakes............................................................................................................................. 7 

Table 2.2: Streams and Rivers ....................................................................................................... 8 

Table 2.3: Habitat Modifications ................................................................................................. 13 

Table 2.4: Forest Age Class......................................................................................................... 15 

Table 2.5: Trails........................................................................................................................... 29 

Table 2.6: Access to Public Use Facilities................................................................................... 32 

Table 2.7: Campgrounds and Boat Launches .............................................................................. 33 

Table 2.8: Bulletin Boards, Interpretive Panels, and Kiosks ....................................................... 34 

Table 2.9: Sport Fish by Location................................................................................................ 36 

Table 2.10: Parking Areas............................................................................................................. 39 

Table 2.11: Sanitary Facilities ...................................................................................................... 40 

Table 2.12: Popular Scenic Viewing Locations............................................................................ 41 

Table 2.13: Popular Wildlife Viewing Locations......................................................................... 42 

List of Figures 

Figure 1.1: Location Map .............................................................................................................. 2 

Figure 2.1: Vegetation Communities............................................................................................. 9 

Figure 2.2: Vegetation Classification .......................................................................................... 10 

Figure 2.3: Habitat Disturbance................................................................................................... 12 

Figure 2.4: Forest Age Class........................................................................................................ 14 

Figure 2.5: Moose Composition .................................................................................................. 19 

Figure 2.6: Existing Recreation Facilities.................................................................................... 31 

Figure 2.7: Existing Firearm Restrictions.................................................................................... 37 

Figure 2.8: Moose Population, Permits, and Harvest Data.......................................................... 38 

Figure 3.1: Administrative Boundaries........................................................................................ 44 

Figure 3.2: Recreation Facilities.................................................................................................. 45 

Figure 3.3: Firearm Restrictions .................................................................................................. 47 
1

Chapter 1: Introduction 

This chapter identifies the purpose for developing the Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area (Skilak 

WRA) Management Plan; provides information on the events that have led the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service) to undertake this planning effort; public involvement in the planning 

process; and the final decision of the Service’s Alaska Regional Director. 

1.1 Purpose for Action 

The purposes of this final management plan are: 

1. To describe wildlife viewing, interpretation, and photography opportunities within the 

Skilak WRA; 

2. To identify development of compatible facilities and programs to facilitate wildlife 

viewing, interpretation, and photography opportunities within the Skilak WRA; and, 

3. To identify other wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities that do not conflict with 

#1 & #2 above. 

1.2 Background 

The Refuge Administration Act, as amended, establishes wildlife-dependent recreational uses 

(hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and 

interpretation) as priority general public uses of the Refuge System, and that if found compatible 

with refuge purposes, should receive enhanced and priority consideration in refuge planning and 

management over other general public uses. 

The 1.98 million acre Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Kenai NWR) (Figure 1.1) is unique 

among Alaskan refuges in that it includes wildlife-oriented recreation, interpretation, and 

environmental education among the major purposes for which the refuge was established as 

identified in Section 303(4) of the Alaska 

National Interest Lands Conservation Act 

(ANILCA) of 1980. 

Section 304(g) of ANILCA directs the 

Secretary of the Interior “to prepare, and 

from time to time, revise, a comprehensive 

conservation plan...for each refuge (in 

Alaska)...”. Kenai Refuge’s Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan was developed in 1984. 

The planning process involved several years 

of data collection and analysis. The general 

public and various federal, state, and local 

agencies participated in the process, helping 
1-0-1: Location Map 
3 

to identify issues and provide comments on Service proposals. In 1985, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service Alaska Regional Director signed the Record of Decision to begin 

implementation of the plan. The Comprehensive Conservation Plan directed the Service to 

establish a special area within the refuge that would be managed to increase opportunities for 

wildlife viewing, interpretation and photography: 

“The entire refuge would remain open to hunting and trapping, except for areas 

where public safety is a concern (i.e., campgrounds, the headquarters/visitor 

center in Soldotna, etc) and in the Skilak Loop Special Management Area, where 

special restrictions on hunting and trapping apply. This area...would be managed 

to provide enhanced opportunities for wildlife viewing.” (Kenai NWR 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan) 

To fulfill management direction identified in the Comprehensive Conservation Plan, the Service 

developed a species management plan for the area in December 1986. The plan identified specific 

goals for providing wildlife viewing and interpretation opportunities, and hunting and trapping 

opportunities were restricted so wildlife would become more abundant, less wary, and easily 

viewed. The Service worked closely with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) to 

develop regulatory proposals that prohibited trapping, allowed taking of small game by archery, 

and provided a moose hunt by special permit. In 1987, the Alaska Board of Game approved these 

regulations that provided a framework for achieving the wildlife population objectives for 

enhanced wildlife viewing opportunities. 

To further support development of wildlife viewing, environmental education, and interpretation 

opportunities in the Skilak area, the Service adopted a contractor’s recommendation (Land 

Design North, Inc) to name it the Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area, and in 1988, developed a 

public use facilities step-down management plan for the area. The Service worked to implement 

the plan over a 17 year period as funding permitted. 

In March 2005, the Board of Game adopted regulations providing for the use of firearms to hunt 

small game and fur animals in the Skilak WRA. In September 2005, the Board delayed 

implementation of the authorization until July 2007, supporting efforts of the Service to prepare 

a Skilak WRA Management Plan. 

1.3 Public Involvement 

Scoping (Identification of Issues)

The planning process began in November 2005 with distribution of a planning update and 

“issues workbook” to approximately 2,500 individuals, businesses, agencies, and organizations 

on the Kenai Peninsula and in the city of Anchorage. The workbook contained a combination of 

multiple-choice and open-ended questions that provided a forum for respondents to identify 

aspects of refuge management or other issues that concerned them. The Service also hosted 

public open house meetings in the towns of Soldotna and Cooper Landing, and in the city of 

Anchorage; and invited members of the public to provide comment in any other format (e.g., 

email, fax, phone) that suited them. In addition, the Service met with representatives from the 

State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources and Department of Fish and Game on 
4 

December 8, 2005 to solicit their input on issues to consider in the plan. Over 220 responses 

were submitted, and many of the responses identified more than one issue for consideration. 

Three issue statements were identified through analysis of public comments. The issue 

statements described the primary values and uses the planning team focused on to develop 

management alternatives identified in the draft plan. These issue statements were: 

• How can facilities that support wildlife viewing, interpretation and photography be 

enhanced while preserving the natural character of the Skilak WRA while minimizing 

impacts to visitors who prefer less development? 

• How can trailhead and campground interpretation be enhanced while maintaining the 

natural character of the Skilak WRA? 

• How can the Service address demand for expanded road maintenance and recreation 

support facilities while maintaining the natural character of the Skilak WRA? 

• How can the Service address hunting-related opportunities within the Skilak WRA 

without conflicting with the area’s priority intended uses? 

Public Review and Comment of the Draft Plan

The Service completed the Skilak WRA Draft Management Plan and Environmental Assessment 

in October 2006. Approximately 2,500 copies were distributed to individuals, businesses, 

agencies, and organizations that had expressed an interest in receiving Kenai NWR planningrelated documents. Notices of availability were distributed to radio stations, television stations, 

and newspapers on the Kenai Peninsula and in the city of Anchorage. An electronic version of 

the plan was made available on the Kenai NWR planning website, and a Skilak email address 

was created to facilitate public comment on the draft plan. Presentations were made to the Alaska 

Board of Game and the Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges. 

The draft plan and environmental assessment were made available for public review and 

comment during a 30-day period ending November 17, 2006. The plan described three 

alternatives, including the Service’s preferred alternative, for managing wildlife viewing, 

interpretation, photography and other wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities. The 

accompanying environmental assessment described the environmental and social consequences 

of implementing the alternatives. Eighty-one responses were received by mail, email, and 

telephone before the deadline. The majority of responses came from private citizens located in 

the greater Soldotna-Kenai area. Sixteen non-governmental organizations, one federal agency, 

two local businesses, and the State of Alaska also responded. Just over half of all respondents 

expressed support for or opposition to a specific alternative. Of those, the majority supported the 

Service’s Preferred Alternative or a modified version of it. 

Summary of Substantive Comments

Substantive comments centered on four themes: firearm use and hunting, Skilak Loop Road 

maintenance, threats to wildlife and wildlife corridors, and facilities. 

Firearm Use and Hunting Opportunities 

The single most common opinion expressed among the responses was support for retaining 

existing firearm restrictions. Respondents who favored continuing to restrict firearms expressed 

concern that wildlife viewers and other non-consumptive users needed a place where they could 

recreate free from the perceived dangers associated with hunting. A few respondents indicated 
5 

their concern that calls to expand hunting in the Skilak WRA would lead to expanded hunting 

opportunities contrary to a wildlife viewing area. Respondents who favored relaxing firearm 

restrictions and/or expanding hunting opportunities typically suggested that conflicts with other 

users were unlikely because hunting takes place in the fall and winter when non-consumptive 

recreation use is low. Most advocates of expanded hunting called for limited expansion in the 

form of small game opportunities and smaller buffer zones, although a few called for virtually 

unrestricted hunting. 

Skilak Loop Road Maintenance 

Maintenance of the Skilak Loop Road was the second-most prevalent topic in respondent’s 

comments. Most respondents who commented on this topic were strongly opposed to paving the 

road. They suggested that paving would encourage drivers to travel at unsafe speeds and 

collisions with wildlife and other vehicles would result. A few respondents worried that the 

Service would restrict use of the road if it were to take over management responsibility from the 

State of Alaska. Among the respondents that explicitly supported paving, half suggested the 

Service should consider speed control measures such as speed bumps or increased speed limit 

enforcement. The main reason given for supporting paving was decreased wear and tear on 

vehicles and trailers. 

Threats to Wildlife and Wildlife Corridors 

Respondents who expressed concerns about wildlife impacts typically suggested that one or 

more formal “wildlife movement corridors” be identified – one west of Skilak Loop Road to the 

refuge’s westernmost boundary, and one along the north shore of Skilak Lake. They suggested 

facilities development should be limited or prohibited in these areas to minimize adverse impacts 

to wildlife. They cited the vital location of the Skilak WRA within the larger Kenai Peninsula 

region, and the potential cumulative impacts to wildlife from current and future developments 

and recreation facilities. 

Facilities 

A relatively small proportion of respondents commented specifically on visitor facilities. Among 

those that did, opinions regarding the collection of visitor facilities and upgrades proposed in the 

draft plan tended to be negative. Most of those respondents felt that proposed facilities were 

unnecessary or too numerous. A few suggested management resources should be aimed at 

improved maintenance of existing infrastructure rather than building more. 

1.4 Decision 

On December 7, 2006, the Alaska Regional Director signed a Decision Notice – A Finding of No 

Significant Impact – for the Skilak WRA based on the environmental assessment completed for 

the draft plan and comments received during the public review period (Appendix A). On May 

11, 2007, the Regional Director signed an amended Decision Notice and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for the Skilak WRA (Appendix B) adopting changes to the administrative 

boundaries and hunting sections of the plan which are fully consistent with regulations adopted 

by the Alaska Board of Game. 
6 

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions 

This chapter describes the physical, biological, and social settings of the Skilak WRA prior to 

implementation of this plan. 

 

2.1 Physical Environment 

2.1.1 Landforms 

The Kenai NWR is located in south-central Alaska on the Kenai Peninsula. Three major 

landforms are present on the Refuge: the Kenai Lowlands, the Kenai Mountains, and the 

Tustumena Benchlands. The Kenai Lowlands and Kenai Mountains are found within the 

boundaries of the Skilak WRA. 

The west and central portions of the Skilak WRA lie within the Kenai Lowlands which fall 

within the Cook Inlet Basin ecoregion. This landform consists of ground moraine and stagnant 

ice terrain with low ridges, hills, muskeg, lakes, and ponds. Relief ranges from 50 to 250 feet. 

The eastern portion of the Skilak WRA lies within the Kenai Mountains which fall within the 

Chugach-St. Elias Mountains ecoregion. The Kenai Mountains rise to 3,000 feet in the Skilak 

WRA and over 6,000 feet elsewhere on the refuge. 

2.1.2 Air Quality 

Kenai Refuge, including the Skilak WRA, is designated a Class II air quality area under the 

Clean Air Act. Class II areas allow some incremental increase in pollution over base-line 

concentrations. Air quality in the Skilak WRA is generally excellent; however, vehicles using 

the Skilak Loop Road during dry periods stir up dust which deteriorates air quality. In addition, 

exhaust from these vehicles degrades air quality along the road corridor, particularly during 

periods of high public use. 

2.1.3 Geology and Soils 

Two geologic terranes are found within the Skilak WRA: Tertiary rock found within the Kenai 

Lowlands (or western and central portions of the area) known as the Alaska Peninsular terrane, 

and Mesozoic rock found in the Kenai Mountains (or eastern portion of the area) known as the 

Chugach-Prince William terrane. 

The Alaska Peninsular terrane is covered by glacial deposits consisting of siltstone, fine 

sandstone, and shale. Lowland soils are mantled by glacial deposits that vary in texture and are 

overlain by well-drained to poorly drained silt loams. Depression areas, such as muskeg, are 

usually covered by peat soils produced by the slow decomposition of organic materials. Sloped 

areas are vulnerable to erosion, especially if vegetation is removed. The Mesozoic rock of the 

Chugach-Prince William terrane is mostly greywacke, a marine sandstone derived from igneous 

rock, with lesser amounts of basalt, radiolarian chert, and limestone. 

2.1.4 Water Resources 

Lentic systems (i.e., lakes, ponds, and wetlands) and lotic systems (i.e., streams and rivers) 
7 

account for more then 4,630-acres or approximately 10% of the Skilak WRA. Aquatic and 

riparian habitats associated with these systems contain unique plant communities and other 

distinguishing features. Riparian habitats account for only 5% of Kenai Refuge but they account 

for some of the most valuable habitat for wildlife. Approximately 199 species use riparian 

habitats on the Refuge during some cycle of their lives, and 139 vertebrate species use them 

specifically for breeding (USFWS 1985). The following provides a short assessment of lentic 

and lotic systems in the Skilak WRA. 

Lentic Systems 

The Skilak WRA contains seventeen lakes totaling approximately 3,490-acres (8%) (Table 2.1). 

Three lakes immediately adjacent to the Skilak WRA are also commonly used by wildlife: 

Bottenintnin Lake, Skilak Lake, and Watson Lake. These lakes amount to 24,831-acres. 

Lakes within the Skilak WRA remain frozen from November to May, and summer water 

temperatures rarely exceeds 68 degrees F. Skilak Lake freezes for shorter periods of time due to 

its size but does not get as warm as the smaller lakes in summer because much of its inflow is 

glacial meltwater. Cold water temperatures and low light levels common in northern latitude 

ecosystems severely limit productivity. High oxygen content, lack of pollution, and physical 

diversity balances these limitations. The net results are conditions that favor the reproduction and 

early growth of anadromous fishes. 

1 Table 2.1: Lakes

Name Size (Acres) Name Size (Acres) 

Blizzard Lake 57 Marsh Lake 110 

Bottenintnin Lake 262 Mox Lake 45 

Chatelain Lake 118 Pack Lake 33 

Egumen Lake 82 Petersen Lake 92 

Engineer Lake 225 Rock Lake 19 

Hidden Lake 1,597 Skilak Lake 24,512 

Hiker’s Lake 61 Unnamed Lake 21 

Kelly Lake 146 Unnamed Lake 13 

Lower Jean Lake 113 Upper Ohmer Lake 20 

Lower Ohmer Lake 116 Watson Lake 58 

Wetland habitats are defined by periodic saturation or coverage of the soil by water. Wetlands 

account for only 3% of Kenai Refuge but they are valuable habitat for wildlife contributing to the 

survival and reproductive success of 96 vertebrate species (USFWS 1985). Wetlands account for 

1,140-acres (2.6%) in the Skilak WRA. 

Lotic Systems 

The Skilak WRA contains nine streams and/or rivers totaling approximately 19-miles in length 
8 

(Table 2.2). These streams, in addition to transporting water from lake to lake, provide access for 

anadromous fish, and reproduction and rearing habitat for resident fish. The productivity of these 

systems in subarctic regions is very fragile and dependent on high water quality, proper water 

temperature, clean stream gravel, and nutrient cycling (driven by the annual return of 

anadromous fish from the sea). 

Wildlife species found in riparian habitats include brown bear, black bear, moose, caribou, river 

otter, beaver, muskrat, wood frog, bald eagle, common snipe, red-necked phalarope, and a 

variety of goldeneyes, grebes, gulls, loons, mergansers, sandpipers, swallows, yellowlegs, and 

terns. 

2 Table 2.2: Streams and Rivers 

Name Length (Miles) Name Length (Miles) 

Hidden Creek 2.7 Ohmer Creek 1.7 

Hidden Lake Inlet 0.2 Unnamed 1 0.6 

Jean Creek 3.1 Unnamed 2 0.4 

Kenai River 7.3 Unnamed 3 1.8 

Moose River, East Fork 1.7 

2.2 Biological Environment 

2.2.1 Vegetation 

Community Types 

Vegetative communities cover approximately 39,368-acres (89.4%) of the Skilak WRA. The 

remaining 4,630-acres (10.6%) are water resources. Forested habitats dominate the landscape 

accounting for approximately 37,438-acres or 95% of all vegetative cover. Other vegetative 

communities, including shrub, herbaceous, and alpine communities make up approximately 

1,930-acres (5%). 

The following vegetative communities (Viereck, et al., 1992) are found in the Skilak WRA 

(Figure 2.1 & Figure 2.2): 

Mixed Forests – Mixed forests consist of needleleaf and deciduous trees. In the Skilak WRA, 

mixed forests consist of white spruce (Picea glauca), black spruce (Picea mariana), quaking 

aspen (Populus tremuloides), and paper birch (Betula papyrifera). These forests account for 

approximately 17,272-acres (43.9%). Open mixed forests (25-59% canopy cover) account for 

9,417-acres (23.0%). Closed mixed forests (60-100% canopy cover) account for 7,855-acres 

(20.0%). Mixed forests are typically found in the east and central sectors of the area with a fairly
2-0-1: Vegetation Communities 
10 

large continuous portion found south of the Skilak Loop Road from the Rock Lake area to the 

Lower Skilak Lake Campground. 

Deciduous Forests – Deciduous forests consist of broadleaf trees. In the Skilak WRA, deciduous 

forests consist of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), and 

black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera trichocarpa). These forests account for approximately 

10,534-acres (26.8%). Open deciduous forests (25-59% canopy cover) account for 1,278-acres 

(3.2%). Closed deciduous forests (60-100% canopy cover) account for 9,256-acres (23.5%). 

Deciduous forests are typically found in the south-east sector of the Skilak WRA, but a 

significant portion is also found in the western sector north of the Skilak Loop Road. 

Figure 2.2: Vegetation Classification 

23.9%

23.5%

20.0%

14.2%

5.3%

5.0%

3.4%

3.2% 1.2%

0.3% Open Mixed

Closed Deciduous

Closed Mixed

Closed Needleleaf

Woodland Needleleaf

Open Needleleaf

Shrub

Open Deciduous

Herbaceous

Alpine

Needleleaf Forests – Needleleaf forests consist of coniferous trees. In the Skilak WRA, 

needleleaf forests consist of white and black spruce. These forests account for approximately 

9,632-acres (24.5%). Open needleleaf forests (25-59% canopy cover) account for 1,972 (5.0%). 

Closed needleleaf forests (60-100% canopy cover) account for 5,591-acres (14.2%), and 

woodland needleleaf forests (10-24% canopy cover) account for 2,069-acres (5.3%). The 

majority of the acreage is found in the north-west sector of the Skilak WRA. 

Shrub – Shrub communities contains two distinct vegetation categories: Closed Tall Scrub and 

Open Low Scrub. This community type accounts for approximately 1,330-acres (3.4%). Closed 

Tall Scrub is dominated by Sitka alder (Alnus effers) and/or willow (Salix spp.), and is 

typically found in wet meadows and near streams. Open Low Scrub primarily consisting of bog 

birch (Betula glandulosa),dwarf arctic birch (Betula nana),bog blueberry (Vaccinium 

uliginosum), and mountain cranberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea) can be found at higher elevations 

on Hideout Mountain. 
11 

Herbaceous – Herbaceous communities are dominated by bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis 

efferson) but also includes various sedges (Carex spp.). This community type is typically 

found along flood plains and edges of lakes or drained wetlands. It accounts for approximately 

465-acres (1.2%) primarily along Hidden Creek. 

Alpine – Alpine communities are dominated by arctic willow (Salix arctica), dwarf arctic birch 

(Betula pubescens), and several species of grasses, sedges, and lichens. The highest elevations in 

the Skilak WRA support alpine tundra. This community type, found only on Hideout Mountain, 

accounts for approximately 135-acres (0.3%). 

Habitat Disturbance 

Approximately half of the forested areas on the Kenai Lowlands (refuge-wide) are in various 

stages of succession largely due to lightening strikes and human-caused fire, but also, as a result 

of management activities such as mechanical crushing and prescribed fire use. More than 

11,000-acres (29.5%) of the Skilak WRA, and an additional 5,000-acres immediately adjacent to 

it, have been managed since 1978 (Figure 2.3, Table 2.3). 

Wildfire – The 1947 Skilak Lake Fire, which was started by a road construction crew, burned 

approximately 310,000-acres in GMU 15A which included 24,945-acres in the Skilak WRA. In 

1963, a 400-acre wildfire burned in the vicinity of Engineer Lake, and in the early and mid1990s, two wildland fires, the Pothole Lake and Hidden Creek fires, burned approximately 

7,000-acres (18.7%) of the Skilak WRA. 

Vegetation Crushing and Prescribed Fire – In 1970, the Refuge purchased three 40-ton 

Letourneau timber crushers. From 1974 to 1978 the crushers were used to manage approximately 

7,000-acres in the northern portion of the Refuge. They were transferred to ADF&G in 1983. 

Over the next four years, approximately 4,000-acres were crushed in and adjacent to the Skilak 

WRA by ADF&G. All but 600-acres were subsequently burned by the Refuge using prescribed 

fire. ADF&G surplused the Letourneau tree crushers in 1988, marking the end of large scale 

mechanical manipulation on Kenai Refuge (USFWS 1996). 

Spruce Bark Beetle Infestation – Kenai Refuge has historically suffered periodic infestations of 

spruce bark beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis). Dendrochronology studies have shown evidence 

of regional bark beetle outbreaks in the 1760s, 1780s, 1810s, 1850s, 1870s, 1910s, 1970s, and 

1990s. Approximately 850-acres (2.2%) have been impacted by spruce bark beetle in the Skilak 

WRA.
2-0-3: Habitat Disturbance 
13 

3 Table 2.3: Habitat Modifications 

Name Treatment 

Type 

Treatment 

Year 

Acres % of Forest 

Cover 

Mystery Creek Vegetation 

Management Area 

Mechanical 

Crushing 

1978 4,300 Adjacent to 

SWRA 

Skilak WRA Vegetation Management 

Area (Unit 1) 

Mechanical 

Crushing 

1984 1,225 3.3% 

Skilak WRA Vegetation Management 

Area (Unit 2) 

Mechanical 

Crushing 

1985 1,972 5.3% 

Skilak WRA Vegetation Management 

Area (Unit 1) 

Prescribed Fire 1986 Same as 

above 

Same as 

above 

Lily Lake Vegetation Management 

Area 

Mechanical 

Crushing 

1986 700 Adjacent to 

SWRA 

Skilak WRA Vegetation Management 

Area (Unit 2) 

Prescribed Fire 1987 Same as 

above 

Same as 

above 

Lily Lake Vegetation Management 

Area 

Prescribed Fire 1987 Same as 

above 

Adjacent to 

SWRA 

Unit 3 Pothole Lake Fire Wildland Fire 1991 1,800 4.8% 

Unit 4 Hidden Creek Fire Wildland Fire 1996 5,200 13.9% 

Throughout Skilak WRA Bark Beetle 

Infestation 

Ongoing 842 2.2% 

Total 16,039 

Forest Age Classes 

Natural processes and management actions have influenced forest succession throughout the 

Skilak WRA. As a result, the Skilak WRA contains a diversity of forest age classes ranging from 

early seral (<20 years old) to climax forests (141-180 years old) (Figure 2.4, Table 2.4). A short 

description of forest age classes follows: 

 

Mature Forests – Forest communities of this age class are dominated by trees that are 41-60 

years old. They are the product of forest succession resulting from the 1947 Skilak Lake Fire. 

Mature forests, which account for approximately 24,945-acres (63.3%), dominate the Skilak 

WRA and consist of a diversity of deciduous, needleleaf, and mixed forest communities. 

Although it is the dominate age class throughout the area, its continuity is disrupted at specific 

locations in the western, central, and eastern sectors where additional fire events have occurred 

and habitat management actions have been implemented. 

Wildlife species found in this age class include black bear, coyote, lynx, porcupine, red-backed 

vole, red squirrel, wolf, dark-eyed junco, gray jay, great horned owl, spruce grouse, and a variety 

of woodpeckers, chickadees, warblers, and thrushes. Approximately 66 wildlife species are 

thought to use this age class for breeding (USFWS 1985).
2-0-4: Forest Age Class 
15 

4 Table 2.4: Forest Age Class 

Forest Age Class Acres % of Skilak WRA Diversity 

Index1

% of All 

Species 

Not Aged 4,855 12.4 n/a n/a 

Early Seral Stage 

(<20 years old) 5,160 13.1 39 19.6 

Intermediate Stage 

(21-40 years old) 3,320 8.4 47 23.6 

Mature Stage 

(41-60 years old) 24,945 63.3 66 33.1 

Climax Stage 

(141-180 years old) 1,100 2.8 68 34.1 

Total 39,380 100% - - 

Early Seral Stage Forests – Forest communities of this age class are dominated by trees that are less 

than 20 years old. They are the product of forest succession resulting from the Pothole Lake and 

Hidden Creek wildland fires. Early seral stage forests, which account for approximately 5,160-acres 

(13.2%) in the eastern and central sectors of the Skilak WRA, are deciduous forest communities. 

Wildlife species found in this age class include black bear, brown bear, coyote, lynx, masked shrew, 

moose, red-backed vole, snowshoe hare, wolf, spruce grouse, and a variety of woodpeckers, 

sparrows, thrushes, flycatchers, and warblers. Approximately 39 wildlife species are thought to use 

this age class for breeding (USFWS 1985). 

Intermediate Stage Forests – Forest communities of this age class are dominated by trees that are 21-

40 years old. They are the product of forest succession resulting from vegetation management 

activities conducted in the mid-1980s. Additional acreage of this age class can be found in the 

vicinity of the Sterling Highway and Skilak Loop Road intersection (East Entrance). Intermediate 

stage forests make up approximately 3,320-acres (8.4%) in the Skilak WRA and consist of a 

diversity of deciduous and mixed forest communities. 

Wildlife species found in this age class include black bear, brown bear, coyote, lynx, moose, redbacked vole, short-tailed weasel, wolf, and a variety of woodpeckers, sparrows, thrushes, 

flycatchers, and warblers. Approximately 47 wildlife species are thought to use this age class for 

breeding (USFWS 1985). 

Climax Forests – Forest communities of this age class are dominated by trees that are 141-180 years 

old. Climax forests make up approximately 1,100-acres (2.8%) in the Skilak WRA. This age class 

can be found in the vicinity of the Sterling Highway and Skilak Loop Road intersection (East 

Entrance) consisting of closed deciduous and mixed forest communities. It can also be found along 

 

1 Diversity Index is the total number of species using the habitat for breeding purposes. 
16 

the Skilak Loop Road where deciduous, mixed, and needleleaf forest communities occur. An 

additional stand is located in the central sector of the area west of the Upper Skilak Campground 

access road below Lower Ohmer Lake. This stand is a closed mixed forest community. 

Wildlife species found in this age class include black bear, coyote, masked shrew, red squirrel, wolf, 

black-capped chickadee, spruce grouse, and a variety of woodpeckers and warblers. Approximately 

68 wildlife species are thought to use this age class for breeding (USFWS 1985). 

Not Aged – Approximately 5,420-acres (12.4%) of the eastern sector has not been aged. Much of 

this area is identified as shrub and alpine communities found on Hideout Mountain. Other portions 

of this area consists of deciduous, needleleaf, and mixed forest communities. 

2.2.2 Wildlife 

Due to the location of the Skilak WRA situated between the Kenai Lowlands, Kenai Mountains, and 

Skilak Lake, the diversity of habitats and relatively undisturbed condition of the area, many if not 

most, of the 199 vertebrates common to Kenai Refuge are also thought to inhabit the Skilak WRA. A 

short assessment of species common to the area and/or those that could be affected by the 

management action follows. 

Megafauna 

Black bears (Ursus americanus)

Habitat – Black bears are found in all forested habitats on Kenai Refuge, though they are most 

abundant in intermediate stage forests (21-40 years old) (USFWS 1985). Although they prefer 

forested and shrubby areas, they will also use wet meadows, ridgetops, burned areas, and riparian 

areas (Pelton 1987). They prefer wet over dry sites, and timbered over open areas (Unsworth 1989). 

Forest habitats dominate the landscape in the Skilak WRA accounting for approximately 37,438-

acres. Intermediate stage forests account for 3,320-acres (8.9%), and mature forests resulting from 

the 1947 Skilak Lake Fire accounts for 24,945-acres (62.3%). 

Population – The black bear population for the Kenai Peninsula is estimated at 3,000 bears (Del 

Frate 2002). Although the population is believed to be stable, fewer moose in the 1969 burn area and 

loss of habitat through continuing human encroachment will probably result in declining population 

numbers (Del Frate 2002). In GMU 15A, bear densities are estimated at 205 bears/1000 km squared 

(or 1 bear per 1,205 acres) for mature forests resulting from the 1947 Skilak Lake Fire (Schwartz and 

Franzmann 1991). As such, mature forests in the Skilak WRA may support up to 20 bears. Although 

the black bear population for the Skilak WRA is unknown, numerous sightings and encounters with 

visitors indicate their use of the area. 

 

Brown Bears (Ursus arctos)

Habitat – Brown bears use 8,800 square kilometers (2,175,000 acres) or 37.7% of the Kenai 

Peninsula (Jacobs 1989). Human activities associated with development are altering important 

brown bear habitat on the peninsula. The infrastructure associated with this growth fragments habitat 

for bears, which need large, undeveloped areas for viability. Kenai Refuge provides the largest 

continuous, homogenous block of brown bear habitat on the peninsula. Habitat use varies seasonally 

in response to food availability (Jacobs 1989; Schoen 1994). Meat obtained from moose, caribou, 
17 

and rodents is an important food source during spring and summer. Salmon are a critical resource 

from the time they arrive in summer to the time bears den in the fall (Hilderbrand et al. 2000). 

Defense of Life and Property (DLP) – Human encroachment into brown bear habitat has led to a 

significant increase in the number of bears killed to protect life and property. Over 150 brown bears 

have been killed in DLP on the Kenai Peninsula since statehood. For the 17-year period from 1973 

through 1989, a total of 38 (2.4 per year) DLP deaths were recorded. The rate of DLP deaths more 

than doubled during the 7-year period from 1990 thorough 1996, when a total of 40 (5.7 per year) 

bear deaths were recorded (ADF&G 2000). Five DLP deaths have occurred within the boundaries of 

the Skilak WRA over the last 25 years. 

Population – The Kenai Peninsula brown bear population is listed as a “Species of Special Concern” 

(ADF&G 2000). Although there is no statistically reliable estimate of the Kenai Peninsula 

population, extrapolation from other regions with assumed similar bear densities has been attempted. 

Jacobs (1989) provided an initial estimate of 150-250 bears. ADF&G biologists later increased the 

estimate to 277 for management purposes (Del Frate 1993). Although the brown bear population in 

the Skilak WRA is unknown, numerous sightings and encounters with visitors indicate their use of 

the area. 

Caribou (Rangifer tarandus)

Habitat – The Kenai Lowlands Caribou Herd is the only caribou herd on the Kenai Peninsula that 

migrates between summer calving grounds and winter ranges. The herd summers in GMU 15A 

typically where poorly drained meadows, sedge bogs, and muskeg habitats are found. In October, 

they migrate to winter in the Moose River drainage including portions of the Skilak WRA. Their 

winter range encompasses 291 square miles (ADF&G et al 2003). They are often observed through 

the month of April in black spruce forests located in the western portion of the Skilak WRA. 

Population – Caribou were extirpated from the peninsula by 1912. In 1966, a population of 29 

caribou (3 males and 26 females) was released at Watson Lake in the vicinity of the present day 

Skilak WRA. By 1993, the herd numbered 66 animals (ADF&G et al 1994). The population 

continued to increase steadily from 96 animals in 1995-96 to a peak of 140 during spring 1999. The 

population has declined slightly since then and is now estimated at 135 animals (Selinger 2005). 

Moose (Alces alces)

Habitat – Moose inhabit white and black spruce forests mixed with birch and willow, riparian 

communities, and herbaceous bogs. Habitat preference varies with season. In spring and summer 

moose can be found in open plant communities where forage is abundant, such as riparian 

communities, bogs, and early seral stage forests. During winter, moose prefer forested areas below 

3,500 feet and move into denser, needleleaf forests as the winter progresses. Ideal winter range is 

composed of needleleaf trees taller than 18 feet with a canopy cover of 75% or greater 

(Timmermann, H.R. 1988). The use of needleleaf forests has been suggested for both predator 

avoidance (Stephens and Peterson 1984) and thermal protection (VanBallenberghe and Peek 1971). 

Moose distribution in winter is limited by the availability of woody food plants and by snow 

conditions. 
18 

Habitat quality has declined throughout most of GMU 15A as forest succession resulting from the 

1947 Skilak Lake fire transitions from an intermediate to mature age class. Approximately 85,000-

acres of intermediate stage forests resulting from a 1969 wildland fire in GMU 15A continues to 

provide browse for most of the moose wintering in the area. In the Skilak WRA summer habitat 

includes early and intermediate stage deciduous and mixed forests and riparian habitats associated 

with lentic and lotic systems. Early seral stage deciduous and mixed forests amount to 5,499-acres 

(11.7%) and intermediate stage deciduous and mixed forests amount to 3,184-acres (8.5%). Winter 

range (i.e., closed needleleaf forests with 50-100% canopy cover) amounts to 5,591-acres (14.2%). 

Roadkills – According to State Trooper records, 

57 moose were killed by vehicle collisions on the 

Sterling Highway in the Skilak WRA (i.e., 

between MP 58-75) from 1998 – 2005 or on 

average over 8 moose per year. Most collisions 

(63%) have occurred on either side of the East 

Fork of the Moose River in the vicinity of 

Egumen Lake (MP 69-71; n=20) and Bottenintnin 

Lake (MP 73-75; n=16). An interagency effort to 

address roadkills along the Sterling Highway is 

currently underway. 

Population – In 1982, 3,000 moose were 

estimated in GMU 15A (Selinger 2004). 

Estimations made in 1987 and 1990 indicated a 

stable population trend in the range of 3,014-

3,850 animals (Selinger, 2004). The population 

exhibited a declining trend through the 1990s, 

probably mainly due the result of forest 

succession in the 1969 burn. In 1995, the moose 

population estimate for GMU 15A was 1,780 

animals (USFWS 1996) and 2,097 in 2001 

(Selinger 2004). 

In the Skilak WRA, moose surveys are conducted 

every other year when survey conditions allow. 

Lack of complete snow cover prevented surveys 

from taking place in 1999-2000, 2000-01, or 

2002-03. Survey data show moose numbers have 

varied over time (Figure 2.5). 
19 

Figure 2.5: Moose Composition in the Skilak WRA during Surveyed Years 

0

50

100

150

200

250

1989-901990-911991-921992-931994-951996-971997-981998-992003-042005-06

Year

Number

Bulls

Cows

Total

Wolf (Canis lupus)

Habitat – Wolves are habitat generalists which do not require a specific habitat type for survival. 

Wolf habitat is based largely on the density of prey species found in a given habitat. To maintain 

wolf habitat, viable, robust ungulate populations must be present. 

Population – Wolves were exterminated on the Kenai Peninsula by 1915. Wolves remained absent 

from the Kenai Peninsula for about 50 years (except for a few rare sightings) until they naturally 

recolonized in the late 1960s. The wolf population on Kenai Refuge reached about 90 animals in the 

1970s. In the early 1980s, it was estimated at 82 with 60% of it located in GMU 15A. From the 

1980s to the early 1990s, average wolf pack territory size in the northern half of the Refuge ranged 

from 180 to 850 square kilometers, and wolf density averaged about 13 wolves per 1,000 square 

kilometers. The refuge likely supports an estimated 80-99 wolves in at least five to seven packs in 

GMU 15A. The number of wolves using the Skilak WRA is unknown. 

Fur Animals 

ADF&G categorizes a number of species as fur animals. The following fur animals are found within 

the Skilak WRA: 

Beaver (Castor canadensis)

Habitat – Beaver require stable aquatic habitat that provides adequate water, a channel gradient of 

less than 15%, and quality food species present in sufficient quantity (Allen 1983). Lakes 20-acres in 

surface area with irregular shorelines provide optimum habitat for Beaver. All of the lakes in the 

Skilak WRA are over 20-acres in size except one and are thought to support beaver. Intermittent 

streams or streams that have major fluctuations in discharge have little year-round value. 

Population – Population density and trends have not been measured and are poorly understood in 

most areas on the Kenai Peninsula, though Beaver numbers are thought to vary dependent upon 

habitat quality or predator abundance. Incidental observations and the trend in nuisance beaver 
20 

complaints indicate that beaver populations peaked about 1984 and have remained relatively stable 

(Spraker 2001). Although the beaver population in the Skilak WRA is unknown, numerous sightings 

indicate their use of the area. 

Coyote (Canis latrans)

Habitat – Coyotes are habitat generalists which do not require a specific habitat type for survival. 

Coyote habitat is based largely on the density of prey species found in a given habitat. Smaller 

mammals such as snowshoe hares, porcupines, and red-backed voles make up the majority of a 

coyote’s diet on the Kenai Peninsula. There is little evident overlap in food habits between coyotes 

and wolves because the latter rely primarily on moose. 

Population – Coyotes are thought to have colonized the Kenai Peninsula during the same period 

wolves were absent (1915-1965). Red fox were abundant prior to 1930 according to long-time Kenai 

residents, however they quickly disappeared as coyotes established and rapidly increased during the 

1930s (Spraker 2001). Today, coyotes are found throughout the Kenai Peninsula at varying density 

levels dependent upon habitat quality or prey abundance, but generally, they are believed to be 

widely distributed and abundant (Spraker 2001). Although the coyote population in the Skilak WRA 

is unknown, sightings indicate their use of the area. 

Lynx (Lynx canadensis)

Habitat – Lynx are cyclically abundant in the forest habitats of the Kenai Peninsula. They require a 

mix of early and late stage habitats to meet their food and cover needs. Early successional stage 

habitats provide lynx with a prey base, while mature forests provide denning space and cover. Lynx 

can also be found in intermediate stage forests when hare are numerous (Heinselman 1973). Early 

seral stage mixed forests on the Refuge, particularly within GMU 15A, appear to have a higher 

carrying capacity for snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus) which are lynx primary prey. In the Skilak 

WRA, there are approximately 4,958-acres (13.2%) of early seral stage mixed, deciduous, and 

woodland needleleaf forests, and 17,026-acres (45.5%) of mature mixed, deciduous, and woodland 

needleleaf forests. 

Population – Lynx populations usually 

fluctuate in a cycle with snowshoe hare 

populations, peaking about every 9 to 10 

years (USFWS 1994). Between 1977 and 

1982, 25 lynx were estimated to reside in 

the northern part of the Refuge. By 1987, 

densities had risen in some areas threefold after a lynx trapping closure in 1984 

(USFWS 1988). In the late 1980s to early 

1990s, lynx showed a preference for areas 

burned by the 1947 Skilak Lake Fire, 

particularly areas that included mature 

forest remnants. Lynx density increased 

noticeably during the mid-1990s in 

response to an increase in the abundance 

of snowshoe hares. Harvest records 
21 

indicate lynx density remained high from 1997-98 to 1999-00 (Spraker 2001). Although the lynx 

population in the Skilak WRA is unknown, routine sightings indicate their presence in the area. 

Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes)

Habitat – Although red foxes can survive in many habitats, they prefer areas with a mixture of plant 

communities (Ables 1971). 

Population – Red fox were abundant prior to 1930 according to long-time Kenai residents, however 

they quickly disappeared as coyotes established and rapidly increased during the 1930s (Spraker 

2001). Although the red fox population in the Skilak WRA is unknown, it is generally believed to be 

rare or absent from the area. 

Red Squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus)

Habitat – Red squirrel inhabits needleleaf forests and mixed forests, and occasionally can be found 

in deciduous forests. They require mature needleleaf trees, preferably white spruce, as a source of 

cones and seed (DeGraaf 1986, Brink 1964). There are approximately 16,951-acres (45.2%) of 

potential habitat for red squirrel in the Skilak WRA including 6,319-acres (16.9%) of mature 

needleleaf forests and 10,632-acres (28.4%) of mature mixed forests. White spruce is found in welldrained soils typical of uplands areas in the Kenai Lowlands and at higher elevations on Hideout 

Mountain. Black spruce dominates poorly drained sites throughout the Kenai Lowlands. 

Population – Although the red squirrel population for the Skilak WRA is unknown, numerous 

sightings along trails indicate their extensive use of the area. 

Small Game 

ADF&G categorizes a number of species as small game. The following small game species are 

found within the Skilak WRA. 

Common Snipe (Gallinago gallinago)

Habitat – Snipe are found in lentic and lotic systems, primarily bogs, ponds, and riparian habitats 

that contain sedges, rushes, and willows. The Skilak WRA consists of 4,630-acres (10.6%) of lake, 

pond, and wetland habitat, and 19-miles of rivers. 

Population – Although the snipe population in the Skilak WRA is unknown, sightings are common 

in the area. 

Ruffed Grouse (Bonasa umbellus)

Habitat – Ruffed grouse occupy a variety of plant communities across its distribution range, 

however, they seem to have higher survival rates in mixed forests than in pure needleleaf forests 

(Barber et al 1989). Throughout most of their range, ruffed grouse prefer pure stands of quaking 

aspen if those stands have a mix of age classes (Gullion 1972) or quaking aspen mixed with other 

deciduous or needleleaf trees. Newly regenerated aspen stands provide nesting cover for up to 10 

years, while 10 to 25-year old aspen are good for overwintering and breeding. Stands over 25 years 

provide nesting cover and food (Perala 1977). The Skilak WRA consists of 17,272-acres (43.9%) of 

mixed forests and 10,534-acres (26.8%) of deciduous forests. Early seral stage deciduous forests 
22 

account for 1,689-acres (4.5%) and more than 8,000-acres of deciduous forests are older than 25 

years. 

Population – Between 1995 and 1997, 232 ruffed grouse were transplanted from Interior Alaska and 

released, in part, one mile from the refuge boundary by ADF&G. Within a year of introduction, 

broods had been spotted at Lily Lake and along the Skilak Loop Road (Steen 1997). The ruffed 

grouse population in the Skilak WRA is unknown. Sightings, although uncommon, indicate their use 

of the area. 

Sandhill Crane (Grus canadensis)

Habitat – In the northern part of its range, sandhill cranes inhabit sedge meadows and wetland 

communities that contain adequate emergent vegetation for nest building (Melvin 1990). The single 

most important factor regulating sandhill crane populations is habitat availability. Nesting effort and 

success, as well as survival of young, correlate directly with the amount and quality of nesting 

habitat (Sharp 1992). In the Skilak WRA, wetlands account for 1,140-acres (2.6%). 

Population – Population estimates and trends have come from direct counts of wintering and 

migrating birds. The total population estimate for the species is 652,000 to 715,000 birds. The 

number of sandhill cranes using the Skilak WRA is unknown. Sightings, although uncommon, 

indicate their use of the area. 

Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus)

Habitat – Snowshoe hares occupy needleleaf and mixed forests in all stages of succession, but early 

seral forests that have dense understories foster peak abundance. Deciduous forests are usually 

occupied only in early successional stages (Grange 1965). The presence of understory cover is the 

primary determinant of habitat quality and is more significant than food availability (Carreker 1985) 

or species composition (Litvaitis 1990). The Skilak WRA consists of 9,639-acres (25.7%) of 

needleleaf forests and 17,289-acres (46.1%) of mixed forests in various stages of succession. Early 

seral stage deciduous forests account for 1,689-acres (4.5%). The condition of the understory in 

these forest communities has not been analyzed. 

Population – Snowshoe hare populations undergo cycles 

that range from 7 to 17 years between population peaks. The 

average time between peaks is approximately 10 years. The 

period of abundance usually lasts for 2 to 5 years followed 

by a population decline. Based on population density studies 

conducted by the Refuge in 1984, average adult hare 

densities were 2.5 adults per square mile in GMU 15A. 

GMU 15A appears to have a higher carrying capacity for 

snowshoe hare than other portions of the Refuge. Hare 

populations increased in the early-1990s and remained 

stable in the area until 1998 (Spraker 2001) when densities 

declined to 1.0 adult per square mile. Although the 

snowshoe hare population in the Skilak WRA is unknown, 

sightings indicate their use of the area. 
23 

Spruce Grouse (Falcipennis canadensis)

Habitat – Spruce grouse, a native species to the Kenai 

Peninsula, can be found in needleleaf-dominated forest 

habitats. Over most of its range, it uses dense, early 

successional stage needleleaf forests (<30 years old) that 

have well-developed middle canopies. Their association 

with needleleaf forests may be less close during periods 

of dispersal and migration. There are approximately 

9,632-acres (24.5%) of needleleaf forests in the Skilak 

WRA with some 1,290-acres (13.4%) of it in early 

successional stage. 

Population – Although the spruce grouse population for 

the Skilak WRA is unknown, sightings along the Skilak 

Loop Road and trails indicate their use of the area. 

Waterfowl (Anatidae)

Species – Ten species of ducks have been identified in the Skilak WRA including four species of 

dabbling ducks (American Widgeon (Anas Americana), Northern Pintail (Anas acuta), Mallard 

(Anas platyrhynchos), and Green-winged Teal (Anas crecca)) and six species of diving ducks 

(Barrow’s Goldeneye (Bucephala islandica), Common Goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), Common 

Merganser (Mergus merganser), Red-breasted Merganser (Mergus serrator), Surf Scoter (Melanitta 

perspicillata), and Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola)). Dabbling ducks, which are typically migratory 

species, are abundant during the breeding season. Diving ducks, most of which are year round 

residents, are common during the non-breeding season but less so during the breeding season. 

Habitat – Dabbling ducks are commonly found on small ponds and wetlands in the Skilak WRA, 

and diving ducks are more common on deeper lakes. 

Willow Ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus)

Habitat – Willow ptarmigan are common in areas with patches of dense vegetation, especially where 

willow or birch shrubs are abundant (Weeden 1965). They are also found in sedge-willow marshes, 

in meadows, and along road and forest edges (Campbell et al 1990). 

Population – The willow ptarmigan population in the Skilak WRA is unknown. Sightings, although 

uncommon, indicate their use of the area. 

Birds 

Kenai Refuge provides a mosaic of habitats for over 150 species of birds or approximately 32% of 

all bird species identified in Alaska. At least 76 species have been recorded in the Skilak WRA and 

87% of those species are known to breed locally (USGS website). Over half of the birds recorded in 

the Skilak WRA are migratory birds which spend only a portion of their life cycle in the area. 

Twenty-five species are year-round residents (Brown 1999). A short assessment of the most 

common bird families follows: 
24 

Gulls and Terns (Laridae)

Species – Three species of gulls and one tern have been identified in the Skilak WRA: Bonaparte’s 

Gull (Larus Philadelphia), Mew Gull (Larus canus), Glaucous-winged Gull (Larus glaucescens), 

and Arctic Tern (Sterna paradisaea). These species are migratory birds that are abundant during the 

breeding season. 

Habitat – Gulls and terns are found in riparian habitats and black spruce bog forests in the Skilak 

WRA. Glaucous-winged gull rookeries occur on various islands in Skilak Lake. 

Raptors (Accipitridae)

Species – Five species of raptors have been identified in the Skilak WRA: Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus), Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentiles), Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus), Redtailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensus), and Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus). These species are 

residents or short-distance migrants that are common during the breeding season. 

Habitat – Bald eagles are regularly found in riverine systems, particularly along the Kenai River 

where salmon and other fish species are readily available. Three Bald Eagle nests are present in the 

Skilak WRA. Northern Goshawks use a wide variety of forest ages, structural conditions, and 

successional stages including transitional zones from bog to forest and forest to shrubland. Riparian 

zones and mosaics of forested and open areas are important hunting habitats, and climax stands are 

typically used for nesting. Sharp-shinned hawks occur primarily in coniferous forests, but are also 

found in woodland needleleaf forests. Northern harriers prefer sloughs, wet meadows, and 

shrublands, and hunt in large forest openings. 

Sandpipers (Scolopacidae)

Species – Six species of sandpipers have been recorded in the Skilak WRA: Red-necked Phalarope 

(Phalaropus lobatus), Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia), Least Sandpiper (Calidris minutilla), 

Common Snipe (Gallinago gallinago), Greater Yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca), and Lesser 

Yellowlegs (Tringa flavipes). These species are migratory birds that are abundant during the 

breeding season. 

Habitat – Sandpipers are found in riparian habitats and black spruce bog forests in the Skilak WRA. 

Sparrows and Juncos (Emberizidae)

Species – Eight species of sparrows and juncos have been recorded in the Skilak WRA: Fox Sparrow 

(Passerella iliaca), American Tree Sparrow (Spizella arborea), Slate-colored Junco (Junco 

hyemalis), Lincoln’s Sparrow (Melospiza lincolnii), Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus 

sandwichensis), White-crowned Sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), Song Sparrow (Melospiza 

melodia), and Golden-crowned Sparrow (Zonotrichia atricapilla). These species are migratory birds 

that are abundant during the breeding season. 

Habitat – Sparrows and juncos are found in all forest communities and age classes in the Skilak 

WRA. 
25 

Thrushes (Turdidae)

Species – Five species of thrushes have been identified in the Skilak WRA: Gray-cheeked thrush 

(Catharus minimus), Varied Thrush (Ixoreus naevius), Swainson’s Thrush (Catharus ustulatus), 

Hermit Thrush (Catharus guttatus), and American Robin (Turdus migratorius). These species are 

migratory birds that are common during the breeding season. 

Habitat – Thrushes are found in all forest communities and age classes except black spruce bogs and 

riparian habitats in the Skilak WRA. 

Waterbirds (Gaviidae, Podicipedidae, and Phalacrocoracidae)

Species – Six species of waterbirds have been identified in the Skilak WRA: Pacific Loon (Gavia 

pacifica), Common Loon (Gavia immer), Red-throated Loon (Gavia stellata), Double-crested 

Cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), Horned Grebe (Podiceps auritus), and Red-necked Grebe 

(Podiceps grisegena). These species are migratory birds that are common during the breeding 

season. 

Habitat – Waterbirds are found in lake systems throughout the Skilak WRA. 

Woodpeckers (Picidae)

Species – Three species of woodpeckers have been identified in the Skilak WRA: Hairy (Picoides 

villosus), Downy (Picoides pubescens), and Three-toed woodpeckers (Picoides tridactylus). These 

species are year-round residents that are common throughout the year. 

Habitat – Woodpeckers are found in all forest communities of all age classes in the Skilak WRA. 

Wood Warblers (Parulidae)

Species – Seven species of wood warblers have been identified in the Skilak WRA: Townsend’s 

Warbler (Dendroica townsendi), Myrtle Warbler (Dendroica coronata), Orange-crowned Warbler 

(Vermivora celata), Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petechia), Wilson’s Warbler (Wilsonia pusilla), 

Blackpoll Warbler (Dendroica striata) and Northern Waterthrush (Seivrus noveboralensis). These 

species are migratory birds that are common during the breeding season. 

Habitat – Wood warblers are found in all forest communities and age classes except black spruce 

bog forests and riparian habitats in the Skilak WRA. 

Fish 

Fish are an important resource on the Kenai Peninsula and in the Skilak WRA. Not only are various 

fish species found in the Skilak WRA attractive to anglers for recreational fishing, they also provide 

an important food source for some of the wildlife that inhabit the region. 

Anadromous Fish

Waters within the Skilak WRA contain several species of anadromous fish. Anadromous fish are 

those species of fish that migrate upriver from the ocean to reproduce in freshwater. In the Skilak 

WRA, these include Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch), sockeye 

(Oncorhynchus nerka), and pink (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) salmon as well as Dolly Varden 

(Salvelinus malma Walbaum). Anadromous fish are found in the Kenai River, as well as Skilak and 
26 

Hidden Lakes. In addition, several lakes attached to the east fork of the Moose River are spawning 

grounds for coho and sockeye salmon. 

Resident Fish

The Kenai River and most lakes in the Skilak WRA contain populations of resident fish. Resident 

fish are those fish species that remain in freshwater systems (streams, rivers, or lakes) throughout 

their lives. In the Skilak WRA, important resident fish species include rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus 

mykiss), lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush), and Dolly Varden. Rainbow trout are found in the Kenai 

River and in many lakes, such as Hidden, Engineer, and Peterson Lakes. Lake trout are found in the 

Kenai River and larger lakes, such as Skilak and Hidden Lakes. There are several species of resident 

fish found in the Skilak WRA, such as sculpins (Cottus spp.) stickleback (Gasterosteidae) and 

whitefish (Coregonus), which have no recreational significance, but are important food sources for 

other fish and wildlife. 

Many of the isolated lakes in the Skilak WRA are not very productive biologically for resident fish. 

Because of the low biological productivity, populations of resident fish remain sparse and growth is 

slow. In the lakes and river systems containing anadromous fish, resident fish often grow at a faster 

rate because of the high amount of food available from spawning salmonids. Resident fish, such as 

rainbow trout and Dolly Varden, gorge themselves on salmon eggs and spawned out salmon flesh. 

These fish reach much larger sizes than the same species located in isolated lakes in the Skilak 

WRA. 

Both anadromous and resident fishes are attractive to recreational anglers in the Skilak WRA. The 

resident populations, because of their low levels and slow growth, warrant especially careful 

management to protect them from excessive harvesting. Some of the lakes can support recreational 

fishing naturally; others cannot. Controlling factors seem to be lake depth, which must be sufficient 

to prevent freezing to the bottom in winter, and the availability of suitable reproductive habitat for 

resident fish. 

2.3 Human Environment 

2.3.1 Brief History of the Area 

The Skilak Lake area has been occupied by humans for at least 5,000 and possibly 9,000 years. The 

earliest inhabitants were big game hunters, pursuing caribou and sheep in the highlands. By about 

1000 BC people were living along the rivers and had a mixed economy based on hunting and salmon 

fishing. The river corridor and Skilak and Kenai Lakes have been major transportation corridors 

across the Kenai Peninsula for hundreds if not thousands of years. 

Russian explorers and traders established trading outposts along the shores of Cook Inlet beginning 

in 1786. By 1794 there were forts at English Bay, Kasilof River, Kenai River and on the north 

Forelands. No more than 150 Russians ever occupied the area but the economic system centered on 

furs established during this time remained intact after the sale of Alaska to the U.S. in 1867. 

In 1848, the mining engineer Petyr Doroshin explored Skilak Lake and the upper Kenai River for 

gold. Although he found traces of it he discouraged further development as unprofitable. An 

American named Stone searched the Skilak Lake area in 1868. In 1884, Joseph Cooper opened a 
27 

trading post at present day Cooper Landing. Gold was found in commercial quantities on the upper 

Kenai River in 1895 by Charles Sickles and James Stetson (McMahan and Buzzell 1986). By 1910-

11, the Kenai River from Cooper Landing to Skilak Lake was claimed for dredging operations. 

Dredging was attempted until 1914 but with little success (Buzzell 1985). Mining activity peaked in 

1910 and tapered off rapidly (McMahan and Buzzell 1986). 

After WWI the economy shifted from mining to a mixed based on summertime mining, big game 

guiding, fur farming, winter trapping, and other activities. Fishing and gardening were important 

subsistence pursuits. The first homestead applications were filed in 1915 (McMahan and Buzzell 

1986; Buzzell 1985). The Skilak Lake area was the focus of these families economic and social 

activities and an elaborate annual subsistence routine developed to use local resources. World War II 

brought a huge influx of new people and recreational development. The Skilak Military Recreation 

Site at the outlet of Skilak Lake was built in the early 1940’s. It was eventually turned over to the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1958. Also during the 1950’s, the Seward Army Recreational 

Center maintained temporary camps on Hidden Lake. 

The Kenai River corridor has always been a major travel route across the Kenai Peninsula. 

Surveying for the Sterling Highway began in 1946 (McMahan and Buzzell 1986). Actual 

construction began in 1947 and the road was graveled in 1948. Though graveled the road was only 

passable in good weather. A portion of the original highway is now the Skilak Loop Road located in 

the Skilak WRA. At first the road was too poor to encourage much traffic and had little impact on 

the area between Sterling and Cooper Landing. In the mid-1950s, oil companies began to explore the 

northern part of the Peninsula along the Swanson River. Increasing development led to road 

improvements and the present highway was paved in 1956. 

 

2.3.2 Local Population 

Kenai NWR lies within the Kenai Peninsula Borough, which is comprised of the Kenai Peninsula, 

Cook Inlet, and a large, mostly unpopulated area, northeast of the Alaska Peninsula. The total 

population of the Borough was 50,980 in 2004 (Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and 

Economic Development). The twin cities of Kenai and Soldotna, along with nearby Sterling, form 

the population center of the Borough. The Borough also includes the cities of Homer and Seward as 

well as numerous smaller communities along the road system and several villages accessible only by 

boat or aircraft 

The population of the Kenai Peninsula Borough is dwarfed by that of the Municipality of 

Anchorage, which is only three hours by road and 15-20 minutes by air from Kenai Refuge. 

Anchorage is the largest city in Alaska, home to 277, 498 people in 2004, or about 43% of the total 

state population (Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development). The 

Anchorage population has grown by nearly 100,000 since the first Kenai Refuge Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan was completed in 1985. At the same time, continuous road improvements have 

made travel between Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula more convenient. 

2.3.3 Summary of Current Use 

The Skilak WRA is one of the most heavily used areas, if not the most heavily used area, of Kenai 

NWR due to its close proximity to population centers, easy access, and diversity of public use 

facilities provided in a natural setting. Recreational choices range from passive to active recreation 
28 

and occur throughout the area during all seasons of the year. In the spring, summer, and fall, 

recreation activities include archery hunting, camping, freshwater sport fishing, hiking, nature 

photography, sightseeing, and wildlife viewing. During the winter, recreation activities include 

cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, and wildlife viewing. Most visitors participate in several 

activities while using the area. 

2.3.4 Public Use Access 

Access to the Skilak WRA is facilitated by two developed roads into and around the area: the 

Sterling Highway and the Skilak Loop Road. Most visitors approaching from the east enter the 

Skilak WRA from the Sterling Highway via the Skilak Loop Road at MP 58. Soldotna, Kenai, and 

Homer residents generally use the Skilak Loop Road west entrance at MP 75. Visitors can access the 

“backcountry” of the Skilak WRA via a number of developed trails, or they can embark on a cross 

country journey off-trail through a variety of habitats. Boaters can access the area via the Kenai 

River or Skilak Lake; pilots can land their aircraft on Hidden Lake, Bottenintnin Lake, and/or Skilak 

Lake; and canoeists can explore a number of lakes accessible from campgrounds and the 

Bottenintnin Day Use Area. 

Roads 

Sterling Highway

The Sterling Highway is a two lane, paved highway that runs east to west for nearly fifteen (15) 

miles along the northern border of the Skilak WRA. It has a speed limit of 55 mph and is a major 

route for intrastate commerce and travel. In recognition of its spectacular scenery, rich cultural 

heritage, diverse recreational opportunities, archeological importance, wildlife, and natural beauty 

the Sterling Highway from MP 37 to the Skilak Lake Loop Road near MP 75 is designated a state 

scenic byway. 

According to Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) traffic figures, in 1996, 2,367 vehicles 

passed through the Skilak WRA using the Sterling Highway on average each day (863,955 vehicles 

per year). In 2004, 3,280 vehicles passed through the Skilak WRA using the Sterling Highway on 

average each day (or 1,197,200 vehicles per year). The Sterling Highway provides access to a 

number of Skilak WRA facilities. 

Access roads originating from the Sterling Highway include: Kelly/Peterson Lake Campground 

Access Road (0.93 mile) and Watson Lake Campground Access Road (0.43 mile). 

Skilak Loop Road

The Skilak Loop Road is a two lane, gravel road that runs east to west through the southern portion 

of the Skilak WRA. It is 18.8 miles in length and has a speed limit of 35 mph. It is the main artery 

into the Skilak WRA. According to ADOT traffic figures, in 1996, 210 vehicles passed through the 

Skilak WRA using the Skilak Loop Road on average each day (76,650 vehicles per year). In 2004, 

398 vehicles passed through the Skilak WRA using the Skilak Loop Road on average each day 

(145,270 vehicles per year). The road provides access to the majority of facilities located within the 

Skilak WRA. 

The Skilak Loop Road, and the access roads leading into Hidden Lake, and Upper and Lower Skilak 

campgrounds, are state roads. Campground access roads are gravel except for the access road to 
29 

Hidden Lake Campground which is paved. The ADOT is responsible for maintenance of these roads. 

ADOT maintenance is performed in accordance with district-wide priorities. Due to budget 

reductions, the Skilak Loop Road receives sporadic maintenance. When road conditions become 

intolerable and ADOT has not responded to requests for maintenance, Refuge maintenance crews 

grade or plow the road to ensure visitor safety. 

Access roads adjoining the Skilak Loop Road include: Bottenintnin Lake Day Use Area (0.36 mile), 

Lower Skilak Lake Campground (1.3 miles), Engineer Lake Campground (0.30 mile), Upper Skilak 

Lake Campground (2.4 miles), Hidden Lake Campground (1.5 miles), and Jim’s Landing (0.20 

mile).

Trails 

Trails are one of the most effective ways for visitors to observe wildlife in a boreal forest setting 

where vegetation is often thick and difficult to see and/or bushwhack through. The Skilak WRA has 

eleven (11) designated hiking trails totaling 19.5-miles in length (Table 2.5). There is an additional 

1-mile spur trail originating from the Seven Lakes Trail that provides access to the northern shore of 

Hidden Lake. 

5 Table 2.5: Trails 

Name Vegetative Communities and Age Classes Length 

(one-way) 

Bear Mountain Closed deciduous forest, open mixed forest, closed tall scrub; 

mostly 20-39 yrs old, some >60 yrs old 

0.8 

Burney’s Closed deciduous forest, closed mixed forest; <39 yrs old 0.6 

Egumen Lake Open needleleaf forest; <19 yrs old 0.3 

Hidden Creek Open needleleaf forest, woodland needleleaf forest, closed 

deciduous forest, dry forb herbaceous; <39 yrs old 

1.3 

Hideout 

Mountain 

Closed deciduous forest, open mixed forest, closed tall scrub; 

<15 yrs old 

0.75 

Kenai River 

(East) 

Closed needleleaf forest, closed deciduous forest, open 

deciduous forest, closed mixed forest; <39 yrs old 

2.8 

Kenai River 

(West) 

Open deciduous forest, closed mixed forest, closed tall scrub; 

<39 yrs old 

2.3 

Seven Lakes Closed needleleaf forest, open mixed forest; <39 yrs old, some 

>60 yrs old 

4.4 

Seven Lakes 

Spur 

Open mixed forest; <39 yrs old, some >60 yrs old 1.0 

Skilak Lookout Closed deciduous forest, closed mixed forest; <39 yrs old 2.0 

Skyline Open deciduous forest, closed mixed forest, closed tall scrub; 

>60 yrs old 

1.9 

Vista Closed mixed forest; <39 yrs old 1.5 
30 

Trails provide opportunities for visitors to access every vegetative community in the Skilak WRA 

except wetland and alpine communities which are susceptible to human-related impacts. Access to a 

diversity of habitats increases one’s chances of viewing a wide variety of wildlife. Six (6) trails 

provide access to closed deciduous forests, five (5) trails provide access to closed and open mixed 

forests, and five (5) trails provide access to herbaceous and tall scrub communities. Only four (4) 

trails pass through portions of needleleaf communities where opportunities for viewing wildlife are 

limited; one of which is the short 0.3 mile trail to Egumen Lake. Because there are few designated 

hiking trails throughout Alaska, particularly in boreal forest settings, the number of trails and 

diversity of habitats within the Skilak WRA makes it a unique destination point for hiking and 

wildlife viewing. 

Rivers and Lakes 

Rivers and lakes provide access to large portions of the Skilak WRA where scenic/wildlife viewing 

can be enjoyed. The most popular river on the refuge (and possibly throughout the entire state) for 

outdoor recreation activities is the Kenai River. The river flows eighteen (18) river miles from Kenai 

Lake to Skilak Lake, and then on for another fifty (50) river miles before entering into the Cook 

Inlet. It flows for nearly twelve (12) river miles through Kenai Refuge; seven of which, as the 

eastern boundary of the Skilak WRA. Users typically put their crafts in at the Cooper Landing boat 

launch (Sterling Highway MP 48), Sportsman’s Lodge (Sterling Highway MP 55), or Jim’s Landing 

(Skilak Loop Road MP 58) and float to either Jim’s Landing or through the Kenai River Canyon to 

Skilak Lake. Crafts are towed, motored or paddled (note: paddling rafts or other small crafts is not 

advised due to high wind conditions on the lake) around Skilak Lake to the Upper Skilak Lake 

Campground boat launch. Nearly 7,000 crafts and 25,000 visitors floated the upper river section for 

either fishing or scenic viewing pleasure in 2004. Nearly 2,000 visitors floated through the Kenai 

River Canyon to Skilak Lake that same year with nearly two thirds of them specifically doing so for 

scenic viewing purposes. 

2.3.5 Public Uses and Related Facilities 

Overview 

The Skilak WRA contains a wide variety of public use facilities that directly or indirectly provide 

services for a multitude of outdoor recreation opportunities year-round including cross country 

skiing, fishing, hunting, photography, snowshoeing, and scenic and wildlife viewing (Figure 2.6, 

Table 2.6). Construction and/or rehabilitation of these facilities began in the late 1980’s as directed 

by the Refuge’s Public Use Facilities Step-Down Management Plan as funding was available. 

Current Uses and Facilities 

Administrative Facilities

One (1) administrative facility is located in the Skilak WRA; a 600-square foot log cabin at MP 13.5 

along the Skilak Loop Road which is used for seasonal employee housing, and storage of 

maintenance equipment and supplies during the summer.
2-0-6: Existing Recreation Facilities 
32 

6 Table 2.6: Access to Public Use Facilities 

Facility Type Sterling 

Highway 

Skilak 

Loop Rd. 

Total 

Administrative 0 1 1 

Boat Launches 4 7 11 

Bulletin Boards / Kiosks 7 14 21 

Cabins 0 2 2 

Campgrounds 4 5 9 

Campsites (“Walk-in”) 0 14 14 

Day Use Area 0 3 3 

Interpretive Sites 0 9 9 

Parking Areas 5 13 18 

Sanitary Facility Sites 5 8 13 

Signs 7 12 19 

Trails 2 9 11 

Viewing Facilities 0 1 1 

Visitor Contact Station 1 0 1 

Wayside Pullout 0 3 3 

Boating and Boat Launches

There are eleven (11) boat launches in the Skilak WRA. Nine (9) of these are located in 

campgrounds (Table 2.7) and two (2) are located in day-use areas (i.e., Bottenintnin Lake and 

Jim’s Landing). Boat launches vary in construction from simple, one vessel-capable gravel or 

dirt ramps, to concrete, two vessel-capable ramps. Motorboat use is allowed on all lakes within 

the Skilak WRA, Skilak Lake, and the Kenai River downstream of Skilak Lake; some lakes have 

a “no wake” restriction to minimize disturbance to water birds. Canoes, rafts, and kayaks are 

unrestricted on all waterbodies. Personal watercraft (i.e., jet skis) are not allowed on any waters 

within the Refuge. 

Cabins 

Two public use cabins are available by reservation only: Upper Ohmer Lake and Engineer Lake 

cabins. These 800-square foot cabins were built in 2004 – 2005. Approximately 341 visitors 

have used these cabins since their construction in August 2004. 

Campgrounds

There are nine (9) campgrounds containing ninety-three (93) vehicle sites in the Skilak WRA 

(Table 2.7). Eight (8) campgrounds have potable water available and two (2) campgrounds have 

a user fee associated with them. 
33 

7 Table 2.7: Campgrounds and Boat Launches

Location MP Number 

of Sites 

Potable 

Water 

Boat 

Launch 

Fee (per 

night) 

Engineer Lake 9.4 3 Yes Gravel Free 

Hidden Lake 3.6 44 Yes Concrete $10.00 

Kelly Lake 67.0 (Sterling 

Highway) 

3 Yes Gravel Free 

Lower Jean Lake 60.0 (Sterling 

Highway) 

3 Yes Gravel Free 

Lower Ohmer Lake 8.5 4 No Gravel Free 

Lower Skilak Lake 13.6 14 Yes Concrete Free 

Peterson Lake 67.0 (Sterling 

Highway) 

4 Yes Gravel Free 

Upper Skilak Lake 8.4 15 Yes Concrete $8 - $10.00 

Watson Lake 71.0 (Sterling 

Highway) 

3 Yes Gravel Free 

Campsites (Backcountry & Walk-In)

There are fourteen (14) “walk-in” campsites located at two (2) campgrounds: Lower Ohmer 

Lake Campground (4 sites) and Upper Skilak Lake Campground (10 sites). The Lower Ohmer 

Campground walk-in campsites have defined gravel pads containing campfire rings and concrete 

picnic tables. These sites are accessible via a short foot path from the parking area. The Upper 

Skilak Campground walk-in campsites are located along a loop trail beginning at the parking lot. 

Amenities are the same as the ones at Lower Ohmer Lake. A gull/cormorant colony on a rock 

outcropping in Skilak Lake is an added attraction at this site. 

Although the majority of camping occurs at campgrounds and designated “walk-in” sites 

associated with campgrounds, “backcountry” camping is allowed and occurs at undesignated 

sites along trails (particularly the Kenai River and Seven Lakes trails), gravel bars along the 

Kenai River, the shoreline of Skilak Lake, and islands in Hidden Lake. Although some of these 

undesignated campsites show signs of impact, the impact is not believed to be detrimental to 

refuge resources at this point in time, and as such, have not been treated to ensure resource 

protection. 

Commercial Services

Commercial (or guided) services are provided in the Skilak WRA. These services are typically 

associated with sport fishing on the Kenai River, but hiking and tour guides also provide 

services. Guides authorized to offer their services must obtain a special use permit from the 

Refuge and are subject to the requirements of the permit’s general and special conditions. 

Permitted guides operating on the upper and lower Kenai River utilize the boat ramps at Jim’s 

Landing, and the Upper and Lower Skilak campgrounds. Other permitted guides use various 

hiking trails and campgrounds. There are approximately sixty (60) permittees using the facilities 

and resources in the Skilak WRA. 
34 

Day Use Areas

There are three (3) day use areas located within the Skilak WRA: Bottenintnin Lake, Jims’ 

Landing, and Lower Ohmer Lake. Bottenintnin Lake is primarily used by canoeists and crosscountry skiers, and Jims’ Landing is primarily used as a takeout for those floating the Upper 

Kenai River. Lower Ohmer Lake day use area was created in 2006 and is associated with a 

campground. Each site has a boat ramp. Jims Landing and Lower Ohmer Lake have sanitary 

facilities. All day use areas have bulletin boards/kiosks associated with them except Bottenintnin 

Lake. 

Environmental Education & Interpretation Facilities

Environmental Education and Interpretation facilities consists of a variety of structures (e.g., 

bulletin boards, kiosks, and panels) which are used to provide information on wildlife and their 

habitats, resource management practices, and other information which increases visitor 

knowledge about the Refuge. 

Amphitheater 

One (1) 50-seat amphitheater is located at the Hidden Lake Campground. Interpretive programs 

are offered from June thru August. 

Birdhouse Bulletin Boards 

Small informational structures, or birdhouse bulletin boards, are located at all eleven (11) 

trailheads in the Skilak WRA (Table 2.8). 

8 Table 2.8: Birdhouse Bulletin Boards (BBB), Interpretive Panels (IP), and Kiosks (K) 

Location Type Location Type 

Bear Mountain Trail BBB Kenai River Trail (West) BBB, IP 

Burney’s Trail BBB Lower Jean Lake Campground K 

Egumen Lake Trail BBB Lower Ohmer Lake Campground K 

Engineer Lake Campground K Lower Skilak Campground K, IP 

Engineer Lake Wayside IP Peterson Lake Campground K 

Hidden Creek Trail BBB Pothole Lake Fire Wayside IP 

Hidden Creek Wayside IP Seven Lakes Trail (Engineer Lake 

& Kelly Lake) 

BBB 

Hidden Lake Campground K, IP Skilak Lookout Trail BBB 

Hideout Mountain Trail BBB Skyline Trail BBB 

Jim’s Landing Day Use Area K, IP Vista Trail BBB 

Kelly Lake Campground BBB Upper Skilak Lake Campground K, IP 

Kenai River Trail (East) K, IP West Entrance K 
35 

Interpretive Panels 

There are thirty-four (34) interpretive panels located at nine (9) sites within the Skilak WRA 

(Table 2.8). 

Kiosks 

Large information structures, or kiosks, are located at seven (7) campgrounds, one (1) day use 

area, one (1) trailhead, and the West Entrance (Table 2.8). 

Environmental Education & Interpretation Programs

Environmental education (EE) is an education process that deals with the interrelationships 

among the natural world and its man-made surroundings. It is experienced-based and 

interdisciplinary in nature. It is a continuous, lifelong process that provides citizens with the 

basic knowledge and skills necessary to individually and collectively encourage positive actions 

for achieving and maintaining a sustainable balance between humans and their environment 

(North American Association for Environmental Education). Interpretation is a communication 

process that forges emotional and intellectual connections between the interests of the audience 

and the meanings inherent in the resource (National Association of Interpretation). 

Refuge staff and interns conduct a 

number of environmental education 

programs throughout the Skilak 

WRA including “The Role of Fire in 

Alaska” where students hike the 

Hidden Creek Trail to explore a revegetating burn site, and “Leave No 

Trace” where students learn the 

seven (7) Leave No Trace principles 

through hands-on activities on the 

Seven Lakes Trail. Environmental 

education programs typically are 

conducted in the spring and fall. The 

following is a representation of the 

number of participants attending all 

Refuge EE programs: 1,863 (2003); 

2,276 (2004); 2,630 (2005). 

Refuge staff and interns interpret refuge resources to citizens with the desire to intrigue and 

motivate them so that they will go on to learn more about and take actions to protect those 

resources. Each summer, interpretive programs are offered at the Hidden Lake and Upper Skilak 

Lake campgrounds. Additional interpretive programs are offered through “Discovery Hikes” on 

Burney’s and Vista trails. Examples of subject matter include “Bear Safety” and “Survivor: 

Techniques and Strategies to Help You Survive in the Alaskan Outdoors.” The following is a 

representation of participants attending all Refuge Interpretive Programs: 1,457 (2003); 1,274 

(2004); 1,174 (2005). 
36 

Outreach Materials and Media for Visitor Orientation 

The Refuge provides flyers and brochures that identify the location of public use facilities 

including cabins, points of interest, and common wildlife species. In addition, the Refuge, 

through a cooperative effort with the Alaska Natural History Association, produces “Refuge 

Reflections” – a newspaper-style publication that provides more comprehensive information on 

facilities and recreational opportunities throughout the Refuge including the Skilak WRA.

Fishing

Fishing occurs on the Kenai River and on every lake in the Skilak WRA that has harvestable 

populations (Table 2.9). Highly sought after species include sockeye salmon, Coho salmon, 

kokanee, and lake trout. 

9 Table 2.9: Sport Fish by Location 

Waterbody Coho Sockeye King Pink Whitefish Rainbow 

Trout 

Lake 

Trout 

Dolly 

Varden

Artic 

Grayling 

Lnose 

Sucker

N. 

Pike 

Egumen X X X X 

Engineer X X X 

Hidden Creek X X X 

Hidden Lake X X X X 

Kelly X X 

Kenai X X X X X X X X 

L. Jean X X X X X X 

L. Ohmer X 

Peterson X X X X 

Skilak X X X X X X X X X 

U. Ohmer X X X 

Watson X X X 

Human Health and Safety (Firearm Use Restrictions)

To provide for public safety, discharging firearms within a 1⁄4-mile of designated public 

campgrounds, trailheads, waysides, buildings, or the Sterling Highway from the east refuge 

boundary to the east junction of the Skilak Loop Road is not permitted by refuge regulation 

(Figure 2.7). 

Hunting

Cow Moose Hunt 

To fulfill public use and resource protection goals in the Skilak WRA, a permitted, antlerless 

moose hunt is allowed when the results of a fall survey (conducted cooperatively between 

ADF&G and Kenai NWR every other year at a minimum if snow cover is adequate) tallies at 

least 130 animals (1.8 – 2.0 moose per square mile of habitat) (Figure 2.8). These surveys have 

been conducted since 1989.
2-0-7: Existing Firearm Restrictions 
38 

Figure 2.8: Moose Populations, Permits, and Harvest Data 

Over the course of 11 separate surveys, overall moose counts have ranged from a high of 225 

during the 1994-95 seasons, to a low of 79 during the recent 2005-06 season. The average count 

has been about 145 moose. Because of the survey methods used, these data should be interpreted 

cautiously; they represent annual “snapshots” of moose within the Skilak WRA rather than 

reliable estimates of the number of moose that reside in or rely on the WRA and adjacent 

habitats. 

ADF&G issued cow moose harvest permits in all but one season (1996-97) during the period 

1989-2000. No permits have been issued since 2000. From 1989 through 1993, 20 permits were 

issued each season (80 permits total) and about 44% of active permit recipients (those that 

actually that hunted) harvested a moose. Thirty-two (32) moose were harvested during this four 

year period. Over the remaining six permitted years (1993-2000) between 20 and 60 permits 

were issued each season and the harvest success rate dropped to about 26 percent. Fifty (50) 

moose were harvested during this period. 

Bull Moose Hunt 

A permitted spike-fork bull hunt is allowed when aerial composition surveys conducted each 

year before December 1 indicate the bull:cow ratio is greater than 40:100. On three occasions 

(1994, 1996, and 1998) the observed bull/cow ratio exceeded 40:100 allowing a spike-fork bull 

hunt during the season following these surveys. Twenty (20) of the 60 total permits issued in 

each of these seasons were for the special spike-fork bull hunt. A total of two spike-fork bulls 

were harvested (one each in 1995-96 and 1997-98). 

157 162

126

225

136

175

164

98

79

169

20

30

60

40

60

30

20 20 20

8 10 13

130 Minimum Population Threshold

11

8 8

6

11

7

0

50

100

150

200

250

Year 1989-

90

1990-

91

1991-

92

1992-

93

1993-

94

1994-

95

1995-

96

1996-

97

1997-

98

1998-

99

1999-

00

2000-

01

2001-

02

2002-

03

2003-

04

2004-

05

2005-

06

Total Moose Surveyed Number of Permits Issued Number of Moose Harvested 130 Minimum Population Threshold
39 

Moose Hunt Summary 

Overall, more than 300 hunting permits were issued and 83 moose (8.3 moose/year on average) 

were harvested during the 10 year period permits were issued in the Skilak WRA. There is no 

clear relationship between overall moose survey numbers and the number of permits issued or 

harvest success rates. 

Small Game Hunting 

A small game harvest is allowed by bow and arrow between October 1 and March 1 each year. 

There is no data on the number of individuals participating in this activity or the number of 

animals harvested. 

Fur Animals and Bear Hunting 

Fur animals and bears can not be harvested in the Skilak WRA. 

Parking Areas

In addition to vehicle parking provided at campgrounds for campers, parking areas are provided 

at eighteen (18) additional locations within the Skilak WRA: eight (8) areas are located at 

trailheads, four (4) areas are located at day use areas, and six (6) areas are associated with boat 

launches and trailheads within campgrounds (Table 2.10). 

10 Table 2.10: Parking Areas 

Location No. of 

Sites 

Location No. of 

Sites 

Bear Mountain Trail 3 Kenai River Trail (East) 18 

Bottenintnin Lake Day Use 

Area 

6 Kenai River Trail (West) 4 

Egumen Lake Trail 6 Lower Ohmer Lake Day Use 

Area 

3 

Engineer Lake Campground 3 Lower Skilak Campground 50 

Hidden Creek Trail 8 Peterson Lake Campground 3 

Hidden Lake Campground 36 Skilak Lookout Trail 10 

Hideout Mountain Trail 4 Skyline Trail 10 

Jim’s Landing Day Use Area 18 Upper Skilak Campground 24 

Kelly Lake Campground 3 Watson Lake Day Use Area 3 

Photography

Scenic and wildlife photography opportunities are abundant in the Skilak WRA due to the nature 

of the topography, the variety and abundance of natural features, habitats and wildlife, and road 

accessibility. Photographing scenic views typically occurs along the Skilak Loop Road, 

particularly at designated waysides, but also from trail vistas, views provided at campgrounds, 

and from lakes. Although there are no designated wildlife photography sites or facilities provided 

to enhance wildlife photography opportunities (e.g., photography blinds), wildlife can be 
40 

commonly seen at specific locations with the 

Skilak WRA (Table 2.14). Commonly seen and 

photographed wildlife include moose, black 

bears, beaver, and a wide variety of birds 

including eagles, ravens, gray jays, and 

passerines. 

Sanitary Facilities

There are twenty-one (21) concrete sanitary 

units and two (2) dump stations located at 

thirteen (13) locations within the Skilak WRA 

(Table 2.11). Sanitary unit vaults are serviced when approximately 80% full; interiors are 

cleaned and serviced daily in fee campgrounds and at least weekly at other sites during periods 

of heaviest use; unit servicing and interior cleaning at other times of the year are performed on 

an as-needed basis. The dump stations located at Hidden Lake Campground and at MP 11.5 are 

provided for recreational vehicles or trailers with self-contained sanitary systems. 

11 Table 2.11: Sanitary Facilities 

Location Number 

of Units 

Location Number 

of Units 

Engineer Lake Campground 1 Lower Ohmer Lake 

Campground 

1 

Hidden Lake Campground 4 Lower Skilak Lake 

Campground 

2 

Hidden Lake Campground 

Dump Station 

1 Peterson Lake Campground 1 

Jim’s Landing Day Use Area 1 Skilak Loop Road Dump 

Station 

1 

Kelly Lake Campground 1 Upper Skilak Lake 

Campground 

3 

Kenai River Trail (East) 1 Visitor Contact Station 2 

Lower Jean Lake 

Campground 

1 Watson Lake Campground 1 

Scenic Viewing

Scenic viewing opportunities are abundant in the Skilak WRA due to the topography of the 

landscape, the variety and abundance of natural features and habitats, and the ability to see it 

from a variety of access points. The typography of the Skilak WRA varies from low elevation 

rolling hills to majestic mountains towering nearly 3,000 feet above sea level. The transition 

point from one landform to the other is easy to recognize driving along the Skilak Loop Road. 

Scenic viewing opportunities, though afforded along the entire Skilak Loop Road are enhanced 

by the availability of three (3) waysides (Table 2.12). Additional scenic viewing opportunities 

are found at trail vistas, along the Kenai River corridor, views provided at various campgrounds, 

and from various lakes. 
41 

12 Table 2.12: Popular Scenic Viewing Locations 

Location MP View Interpretation Provided 

Pothole Lake Wayside 2.4 1991 Pothole Lake Fire 

and Succession 

Wildlife & Vegetative 

Response to Fire 

Kenai River Trail 0.6 Kenai River Canyon Natural Geologic Features, 

Wildlife Species 

Hidden Creek Wayside 5.1 Hidden Creek, Kenai 

River, Skilak Lake 

Identification of Natural 

Features, Wildlife Species, 

Human History 

Skilak Lookout Trail 5.4 Skilak Lake, Designated 

Kenai Wilderness 

--- 

Bear Mountain Trail 6.0 Hidden Creek, Kenai 

River, Skilak Lake 

--- 

Engineer Lake Wayside 9.3 Engineer Lake Identification of Natural 

Features, Wildlife Species 

Lower Skilak Lake 

Campground 

13.6 Skilak Lake, Designated 

Kenai Wilderness 

Salmon and Other Fish, 

Wildlife Species, Bear Safety 

Information, Kenai 

Wilderness 

Hideout Mt. Trailhead 

Parking Area 

1.9 1991 Pothole Lake Fire / 

2004 Kenai Trail Fire 

and Succession 

--- 

Signs

Information, direction, and location signs are located throughout the Skilak WRA. Signs consist 

of a variety of types ranging from small, wooden trailhead designators to large, aluminum road 

signs posted for visitor safety. 

Trapping

Trapping is prohibited by regulation within the Skilak WRA. 

Viewing Facilities

One (1) viewing platform is provided at Hidden Lake Campground. This facility is a wooden 

deck, approximately 6 ft. X 10 ft., located on the lake shoreline between the boat ramp and the 

picnic shelters in the campground day-use area. In addition to scenic views of the lake and 

surrounding forested areas, common wildlife seen include loons, gulls, terns, and other 

waterfowl, as well as immature salmon and lake trout in shallow areas below the platform. 

Visitor Contact Station 

The Visitor Contact Station (VCS) is a 500-square foot log cabin located at MP 58 of the 

Sterling Highway on the north side of the road, located approximately 100 yards east of the east 

entrance. The VCS is a primary contact point for Refuge visitors who stop to obtain general or 

specific information about the Refuge or the Kenai Peninsula. There are interpretive displays, an 
42 

Alaska Natural History Association sales outlet, restrooms, and potable water. The VCS is 

staffed from approximately Memorial Day until mid-August, with open hours from 

approximately 9:00 am – 6:00 pm. 

Waysides

There are three (3) designated waysides located along the Skilak Loop Road: Hidden Creek 

Overlook (MP 5.1), Pothole Lake Fire Overlook (MP 2.4), and Engineer Lake Overlook (MP 

9.3). Each wayside has interpretive panels that provide information on wildlife and their habitats, 

management practices, and other information which increases visitor knowledge about the 

Refuge. There are a number of other “undeveloped” locations along the Skilak Loop Road where 

visitors typically pull off the road to enjoy scenic vistas and/or observe wildlife. 

Wildlife Viewing

Wildlife viewing opportunities are abundant in the Skilak WRA due to the variety and 

undisturbed nature of habitats which wildlife depend, and the ability to access the area through a 

variety of transportation methods. Although there are no designated wildlife viewing sites or 

facilities provided to enhance such opportunities (e.g., platforms, spotting scopes, etc), wildlife 

can be commonly seen at specific locations with the Skilak WRA (Table 2.13). Wildlife 

commonly seen include moose, black bears, beaver, and a wide variety of birds. 

13 Table 2.13: Popular Wildlife Viewing Locations 

Location MP Location MP 

Bear Mountain Trail 6.0 Pothole Lake Fire Wayside 2.4 

Engineer Lake Wayside 9.3 Skilak Lookout Trail 5.4 

Hidden Creek Wayside 5.1 Skilak Loop Road All 

Kenai River Trail (East & West) 0.6 & 2.3 Upper Skilak Lake Campground 8.4 

Lower Skilak Lake Campground 13.6 

Winter Recreation/Activities

Winter recreation activities include camping and cabin use, cross-country skiing, ice-fishing, 

photography, small game hunting, and snowshoeing. 

2.3.6 Significant Concerns 

Water skiing and the use of personal watercraft (e.g., jet skis) at Hidden Lake and Skilak Lake 

are not wildlife-dependent recreation activities and may negatively impact wildlife (especially 

waterbirds) and other human users. Increasing incidents of these activities have been observed by 

Refuge staff. 
43 

Chapter 3: Management Direction 

This chapter describes the management direction adopted in this plan. It was prepared from the 

draft plan’s preferred alternative and modified by the Service’s Alaska Regional Director in 

response to public comment. Regulations will be required to implement proposed changes to 

current hunting opportunities. Appendix B contains the Service’s regulatory proposal to the 

Alaska Board of Game to implement a youth hunt in the Skilak WRA. 

3.1 Management Direction 

Administrative Boundaries

The Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area will be bounded by a line beginning at the easternmost 

junction of the Sterling Highway and the Skilak Loop Road (MP 58), then due south to the south 

bank of the Kenai River, then southerly along the south bank of the Kenai River to its confluence 

with Skilak Lake, then westerly along the north shore of Skilak Lake to Lower Skilak Lake 

campground, then northerly along the Lower Skilak Lake campground road and the Skilak Loop 

Road to its western junction with the Sterling Highway (MP 75.1), then easterly along the 

Sterling Highway to the point of beginning (Figure 3.1). 

Administrative Facility

The existing Administrative Facility located off the Skilak Loop Road at MP 5.3 will be 

maintained and enhanced as needed (Figure 3.2). The following amenities will be considered: 

1) 500-square foot seasonal office space, 2) 350-square foot shop, and 3) 1,000-square foot 

housing facility for Visitor Services staff. 

Boat Launches

The existing boat launch at Engineer Lake will be improved. Through a cooperative effort with 

State of Alaska Department of Transportation, construct a boat launch at the Lower Jean Lake 

Day Use Area (north shore) (Figure 3.2). 

Bulletin Boards & Kiosks

Bulletin boards or kiosks will be provided at the following five (5) locations (Figure 3.2): 

1) Burney’s Trailhead Parking Area, 2) East Entrance Parking Area, 3) Moose Habitat 

Enhancement Loop Trailhead Parking Area, 4) Mox/Chatelain Trailhead Parking Area, and 

5) Visitor Contact Station Parking Area (West Entrance). 

Existing bulletin boards will be upgraded to kiosks at the following five (5) locations: 1) Hidden 

Creek Trailhead, 2) Hideout Mountain Trailhead, 3) Kenai River Trailhead (West), 4) Skilak 

Lookout Trailhead, and 5) Vista Trailhead. 

Campgrounds

The following campground-related work would be implemented (Figure 3.2): 1) Relocate the 

Engineer Lake Campground to the bluff above the lake to include designation of six (6) vehicle 

camping sites, 2) Rehabilitate the Kelly Lake Campground to include designation of eight (8) 
3-0-1: Administrative Boundaries 
3-0-2: Recreation Facilities 
46 

vehicle camping sites, and 3) Rehabilitate the Peterson Lake Campground to include designation 

of four (4) vehicle camping sites. 

To address public safety concerns associated with entry and exit from/to the Sterling Highway at 

Lower Jean Lake the existing campground would be replaced, through a cooperative effort with 

the State of Alaska Department of Transportation, with a day use area and related facilities 

located on the lake’s north shore (see Day Use Areas below). 

Day Use Areas

The existing Engineer Lake Campground will be converted to a day use area after the new 

campground is constructed on the bluff above the lake (Figure 3.2). 

To address public safety concerns associated with entry and exit from/to the Sterling Highway at 

Lower Jean Lake the existing campground will be replaced, through a cooperative effort with the 

State of Alaska Department of Transportation, with a day use area and related facilities located 

on the lake’s north shore (Figure 3.2). 

Environmental Education Complex

An Environmental Education Complex consisting of two buildings – a 2,000 square foot Nature 

Center, and a 10,000 square foot Boreal Forest Lands Research and Management Training 

Facility – will be constructed west of Pack Lake off of the Skilak Loop Road at MP 8.8 (Figure 

3.2). 

Environmental Education “Ranger” Programs

Campfire programs and Discovery Hikes offered by Refuge personnel will be increased by 20% 

and offered year-round, including the shoulder seasons (September – May), and a “Roving 

Ranger” program will be initiated. 

Hardened Campsites (“Walk-in” and “Backcountry” Campsites)

Two (2) hardened “walk-in” campsites would be provided at Kelly Lake Campground, and one 

(1) hardened “walk-in” campsite will be provided at Peterson Lake campground (Figure 3.2). 

To protect refuge resources, hardened “backcountry” campsites will be identified and developed 

for voluntary use along the Seven Lakes Long Distance Loop Trail. Campsites will be no closer 

than 0.5 mile apart (Figure 3.2). 

Human Health and Safety (Firearm Use Restrictions)

Discharging firearms within 1⁄4 mile of designated public campgrounds, trailheads, waysides, 

buildings, or the Sterling Highway from the east refuge boundary to the east junction of the 

Skilak Loop Road will not be allowed (Figure 3.3). 

Interpretive Drives

A self-guided Vegetation Management Interpretive Loop Drive will be constructed along the 

Skilak Loop Road at MP 2.0 (Figure 3.2). Interpretive materials will be developed for this road
3-0-3: Firearm Use Restrictions 
48 

and the Skilak Loop Wildlife Drive (see Outreach Materials and Media below). 

Interpretive Panels

Interpretive panels will be provided at the 

following ten (10) locations (Figure 3.2): 

1) Engineer Lake Day Use Area Platform (west 

shore), 2) Kelly Lake Viewing Platform (north 

shore), 3) Lower Jean Lake Day Use Area 

(north shore), 4) Lower Ohmer Lake Family 

Loop Trailhead, 5) Marsh Lake Viewing 

Platform (east shore), 6) Nature Center 

Disability-Accessible Interpretive Trail, 

7) Peterson Lake Viewing Platform (south 

shore), 8) Skilak Lake/Redoubt Mountain 

Wayside, 9) Upper Ohmer Lake Viewing 

Platform, and 10) Vegetation Management 

Interpretive Loop Drive. 

Interpretive Trail

A 1.0-mile long disability-accessible Interpretive Trail will be constructed at the Pack Lake 

Environmental Education Complex. 

Outreach Materials and Media for Visitor Orientation

A variety of outreach materials (e.g., brochures, pamphlets, etc) and media formats (e.g., audio 

tapes, CD, DVD, MP3) will be developed to educate visitors about the Skilak WRA. Educational 

topics may include: 1) Purpose and management of the Skilak WRA, 2) Recreation opportunities 

and related facilities, 3) Interpretive / educational opportunities and related facilities, 4) Common 

wildlife species and opportunities to view them identified by milepost, 5) Recorded calls of 

common avian species, and 6) Human history of the area. 

Parking Areas

The existing Engineer Lake Campground parking area will be rehabilitated. The Refuge will 

construct three (3) parking areas at the following locations (Figure 3.2): 1) Moose Habitat 

Enhancement Loop Trailhead, 2) Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex, and 3) 

Vegetation Management Interpretive Drive. Through a cooperative effort with State of Alaska 

Department of Transportation, parking areas would be constructed at the following locations: 

1) East Entrance (Skilak Loop/Sterling Highway Intersection), 2) Lower Jean Lake Day Use 

Area, 3) Mox/Chatelain Lakes Trailhead, and 4) West Entrance (Skilak/Sterling Intersection).

Sanitary Facilities

Sanitary facilities will be provided at the following four (4) locations (Figure 3.2): 1) Lower Jean 

Lake Day Use Area (1 unit), 2) Mox/Chatelain Lakes Trailhead (1 unit), 3) Pack Lake 

Environmental Education Complex (1 unit), and 4) Visitor Contact Station (West Entrance). The 

frequency of servicing sanitary facilities will be increased during the highest visitor use months, 

and will occur weekly during the shoulder season (September – May). 
49 

Signs (Information, Direction, Location)

The following actions will be implemented: 1) Signs containing the “binocular” wildlife viewing 

logo will be placed on the Sterling Highway in advance of the East and West Entrances, 

2) “Welcome to the Skilak WRA” monuments will be constructed at the East and West 

Entrances, 3) Information, direction, and location signs for all public use facilities will be 

provided / enhanced along the Skilak Loop Wildlife Drive and Sterling Highway, and 4) 

Milepost markers will be provided along the Skilak Loop Wildlife Drive. 

Skilak Loop Road

The Service will continue to pursue ongoing efforts to improve road maintenance and year-round 

public access through a cooperative effort with the Alaska Department of Transportation. 

Trails

The following trails segments will be constructed (Figure 3.2): 

1) Hideout Mountain Scenic Trail (2.5 miles) 

• Connect Burney’s Trail to Hideout Mountain Trail via 1.5-mile connector trail 

2) Kenai River Extension Trail 

• Construct 1-mile trail initiating from the end of the existing Kenai River Trail 

southwest towards, but not to, Hidden Creek/Skilak Lake. 

3) Skilak Lookout Extension Trail 

• Connect existing Skilak Lookout Trail to existing Vista Trail (1.6 miles) 

4) Lower Ohmer Lake Campground Family Loop Trail (1.4 miles) 

5) Seven Lakes Long Distance Loop Trail (10.0 miles) 

• Construct a Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trail off the Skilak Loop Road 

(1.2 miles) 

• Connect the Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trail to Marsh Lake (1.0 mile) 

• Connect Marsh Lake to Egumen/Peterson/Kelly Lakes (2.0 miles) 

• Connect Egumen/Peterson/Kelly Lakes trail to existing Seven Lakes Trail 

(2.5 miles) 

• Connect Seven Lakes Trail to the Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex 

(1.0 mile) 

• Connect the Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex to the Moose Habitat 

Enhancement Loop Trailhead (1.5 miles) 

6) Mox/Chatelain Lake Trail (4.5 miles) 

• Sterling Highway Trailhead Parking Area to Mox Lake (1.0 mile) 

• Connect Mox Lake to Chatelain Lake (2.0 miles) 

• Connect Mox Lake to existing Seven Lake Trail (1.5 miles) 

Vegetation Management

Prescribed and wildland fire use, and mechanical treatment (if applicable) will be used to 

enhance wildlife viewing, environmental education/interpretation and photography opportunities 

at the following two (2) locations (Figure 3.2): 1) Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trail 

northwest of the Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex, and 2) Vegetation Management 

Interpretive Drive. Treatment would be conducted on approximately 50 – 100 acres/year when 

conditions permit. 
50 

Viewing Facilities

Viewing platforms with spotting scopes will be constructed at the following five (5) locations 

(Figure 3.2): 1) Engineer Lake (west shore), 2) Kelly Lake (north shore), 3) Marsh Lake (east 

shore), 4) Peterson Lake (south shore), and 5) Upper Ohmer Lake (east shore). 

Photo blinds will be constructed at the following two (2) locations (Figure 3.3): 1) Egumen Lake 

(north shore), and 2) Rock Lake (east shore). 

A viewing tower with spotting scope(s) will be constructed along the Vegetation Management 

Interpretive Drive. 

Additional spotting scopes will be provided at the following two (2) locations: 1) Hidden Creek 

Wayside Pullout, and 2) Skilak Lake / Redoubt Mountain Wayside Pullout. 

In addition, refuge biologists, public use specialists, and maintenance personnel will consider 

and evaluate the feasibility of developing a Track Trap facility at an appropriate location. The 

facility will capture animal track impressions for interpretation and education purposes. 

Visitor Contact Station

A Visitor Contact Station will be constructed at the West Entrance (Figure 3.2). Information will 

be provided year-round including periods when the facility is not attended by staff. 

Wayside Pullouts

An undeveloped wayside pullout located at MP 12.6 along the Skilak Loop Road will be 

enhanced (Figure 3.2). 

Wildlife Management 

Moose: 

To provide opportunities to view moose populations in relatively natural settings throughout the 

year; to interpret various components of the moose population, their behavior, and habitat; and to 

provide opportunities for the public to harvest moose when removal is desirable to achieve 

public use and resource protection goals the following wildlife management strategies will be 

implemented: 

Resident moose population densities of 130 animals (1.8 – 2.0 animals per square mile of 

habitat) will be managed for. Population density will be determined utilizing the standard density 

census as defined by ADF&G and FWS and will be conducted every second year at a minimum 

assuming adequate snow cover. Sex ratios will be allowed to rise to a minimum of 40 bulls/100 

cows as measured with the standard composition survey. This survey will be conducted before 

December 1 each year. To avoid habitat damage, harvest of cow moose by firearm will be 

allowed by permit only when populations exceed density objectives. Harvest of spike-fork bulls 

by firearm will be allowed by permit only when ratio objectives are exceeded. 

Kenai NWR and ADF&G will jointly re-evaluate moose population objectives to provide for 

healthy moose populations and enhance viewing opportunities based on currently ongoing 

studies and/or other scientific information provided in the future. 
51 

Small Game: 

To provide opportunities to view small game populations in a relatively natural setting; to 

interpret and provide prey for predators particularly raptors such as bald eagles, goshawks, and 

great-horned owls, and lynx and coyotes; and to provide opportunities for the public to harvest 

these species the following wildlife management strategies will be implemented: 

During the period October 1 to March 1, each year, harvest of small game by bow and arrow will 

be allowed. A standard 22 caliber rim fire or shotgun youth hunt will be open for a period of 18 

days between November 1 and March 1 each year and will include small game species as defined 

by State of Alaska regulations. The open area remains that area west of the Seven Lakes Trail. 

The hunt will be open to youth hunters 16 years old or younger accompanied by a licensed 

hunter who has successfully completed a certified hunter education course if the youth has not, 

and who is 18 years old or older. 

Fur Animals and Bears: 

Harvest will not be allowed. 

Wildlife Travel Corridor

A wildlife travel corridor will be identified along the north shore of Skilak Lake within the 

administrative boundaries of the Skilak WRA (Figure 3.2). The 1⁄2-mile wide corridor, from 

Lower Skilak Lake Campground to the outlet of the Kenai River into Skilak Lake, will be free of 

development except for the existing Lower Skilak Lake Campground and Upper Skilak Lake 

Campground which will remain as currently designed, and maintained to facilitate continued 

public use. 

3.2 Coordination with the State Of Alaska 

In 1982, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the Alaska Department of Fish and 

Game (ADF&G) signed a Master Memorandum of Understanding that defines the cooperative 

management roles of each agency and identifies the framework for cooperation between the two 

agencies. In this agreement the agencies recognized the Service as the agency with the 

responsibility to conserve fish and wildlife and their habitats and regulate human use on Service 

lands. The ADF&G was recognized as the agency with the primary responsibility to manage fish 

and resident wildlife within the State of Alaska. Furthermore, the Department agreed to manage 

fish and resident wildlife populations in their natural diversity on Service lands. The Service and 

ADF&G share a concern for all fish and wildlife resources and their habitats, and both agencies 

are engaged in extensive fish and wildlife conservation, management, and protection programs. 
52 

Chapter 4: Implementation 

The budget/funding process of the National Wildlife Refuge System is structured so that the Refuge System submits 

Congress through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of Interior. Wildlife refuges develop projecmanagement objectives, develop a monetary figure to accomplish the project/program, and assign a station priority. Tentered into a national database; regional and national offices assign priorities as they develop annual funding requestDepartment. Consequently, there are no means for a wildlife refuge to accurately predict when a project or program Kenai Refuge’s priorities for implementing the management direction in this plan are listed below: 

Direction Schedule 

Administrative Boundaries The Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area will be bounded by a line beginning at the easternmost junction of the Sterling Highway and the Skilak Loop Road (MP 58), then due south to the south bank of the Kenai River, then southerly along the south bank of the Kenai River to its confluence with Skilak Lake, then westerly along the north shore of Skilak Lake to Lower Skilak Lake campground, then northerly along the Lower Skilak Lake campground road and the Skilak Loop Road to its western junction with the Sterling Highway (MP 75.1), then easterly along the Sterling Highway to the point of beginning. 

The Service, with support oADF&G, has submitted the adjustment to the State of ABoard of Game through its proposal process. 

Administrative Facility The existing Administrative Facility located off the Skilak Loop Road at MP 5.3 will be maintained and enhanced as needed. 

This facility will be entered appropriate funding databaimmediately. 

Boat Launches The existing boat launch at Engineer Lake will be improved. Through a cooperative effort with the State of Alaska Department of Transportation, construct a boat launch at the Lower Jean Lake Day Use Area (north shore). 

This facility will be entered appropriate funding databaimmediately. The Service will initiate diswith state DOT to request adevelopment funds immedi
53 

Direction Schedule Bulletin Boards & Kiosks Bulletin boards or kiosks will be provided at the following five (5) locations: 

• Burney’s Trailhead Parking Area • East Entrance Parking Area • Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trailhead Parking Area • Mox/Chatelain Trailhead Parking Area • Visitor Contact Station Parking Area (West) 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. 

Existing bulletin boards will be upgraded to kiosks at the following five (5) locations: 

• Hidden Creek Trailhead • Hideout Mountain Trailhead • Kenai River Trailhead (West) • Skilak Lookout Trailhead • Vista Trailhead 

Campgrounds The following campground-related work will be implemented: 

• Relocate the Engineer Lake Campground to the bluff above the lake to include 

designation of six (6) vehicle camping sites 

• Rehabilitate the Kelly Lake Campground to include designation of eight (8) vehicle 

camping sites 

• Rehabilitate the Peterson Lake Campground to include designation of four (4) vehicle 

camping sites 

To address public safety concerns associated with entry and exit from/to the Sterling Highway at Lower Jean Lake the existing campground will be replaced, through a cooperative effort with the 

Alaska Department of Transportation, with a day use area located on the lake’s north shore. 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately if not already The Service will initiate diswith state DOT to request development funds for this 

Day Use Areas The existing Engineer Lake Campground will be converted to a day use area after the new campground is constructed on the bluff above the lake. To address public safety concerns associated with entry and exit from/to the Sterling Highway at Lower Jean Lake the existing campground will be replaced, through a cooperative effort with the Alaska Department of Transportation, with a day use area located on the lake’s north shore. 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately if not already The Service will initiate diswith state DOT to request development funds for this 
54 

Direction Schedule Environmental Education Complex An Environmental Education Complex consisting of two buildings – a 2,000 square foot Nature Center, and a 10,000 square foot Boreal Forest Lands Research and Management Training Facility – will be constructed west of Pack Lake off of the Skilak Loop Road at MP 8.8. 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. 

Environmental Education “Ranger” Programs Campfire programs and Discovery Hikes offered by Refuge personnel will be increased by 20% and offered year-round, including the shoulder seasons (September – May), and a “Roving Ranger” program will be initiated. 

Additional staff positions to accomplish these program will be entered into the appfunding database immediat

Hardened Campsites (“Walk-in” and “Backcountry” Campsites) Two (2) hardened “walk-in” campsites would be provided at Kelly Lake Campground, and one (1) hardened “walk-in” campsite will be provided at Peterson Lake campground. 

To protect refuge resources, hardened “backcountry” campsites will be identified and developed 

for voluntary use along the Seven Lakes Long Distance Loop Trail. Campsites will be no closer than 0.5 mile apart. 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately if not already 

Human Health and Safety Discharging firearms within 1⁄4 mile of designated public campgrounds, trailheads, waysides, buildings, or the Sterling Highway from the east refuge boundary to the east junction of the Skilak Loop Road will not be allowed. 

Immediately. 

Interpretive Drive A self-guided Vegetation Management Interpretive Loop Drive will be constructed along the Skilak Loop Road at MP 2.0. 

This facility will be entered appropriate funding databaimmediately. 

Interpretive Panels Interpretive panels will be provided at the following ten (10) locations: 

• Engineer Lake Day Use Area Platform (West Shore) 

• Kelly Lake Viewing Platform (North Shore) • Lower Jean Lake Day Use Area (North Shore) • Lower Ohmer Lake Family Loop Trailhead • Marsh Lake Viewing Platform (East Shore) • EE Complex Disability-Accessible Interpretive Trail • Peterson Lake Viewing Platform (South Shore) • Skilak Lake/Redoubt Mountain Wayside • Upper Ohmer Lake Viewing Platform • Vegetation Management Interpretive Loop Drive 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. 
55 

Direction Schedule Interpretive Trail A 1.0 mile long disability-accessible Interpretive Trail will be constructed at the Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex. 

This facility will be entered appropriate funding databaimmediately. 

Outreach Materials and Media for Visitor Orientation A variety of outreach materials (e.g., brochures, pamphlets, etc) and media formats (e.g., audio tapes, CD, DVD, MP3) will be developed and used to educate visitors about the Skilak WRA. 

These program enhancemeentered into the appropriate database immediately. 

Parking Areas The existing Engineer Lake Campground parking area will be rehabilitated. Parking areas will be constructed at the following three (3) locations: 

• Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trailhead 

• Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex • Vegetation Management Interpretive Drive. 

Through a cooperative effort with State of Alaska Department of Transportation, parking areas 

will be constructed at the following locations: 

• East Entrance (Skilak Loop/Sterling Highway Intersection) • Lower Jean Lake Day Use Area • Mox/Chatelain Lakes Trailhead • West Entrance (Skilak/Sterling Intersection). 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately if not already Additionally, the Service wdiscussions with state DOT appropriate development futhis project. 

Sanitary Facilities Sanitary facilities will be provided at the following four (4) locations: 

• Lower Jean Lake Day Use Area (1 unit) 

• Mox/Chatelain Lakes Trailhead (1 unit) • Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex (1 unit) • Visitor Contact Station (West Entrance). 

The frequency of servicing sanitary facilities will be increased during the highest visitor use 

months, and will occur weekly during the shoulder season (September – May). 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. 
56 

Direction Schedule Signs (Information, Direction, Location) The following actions will be implemented: 

• Signs containing the “binocular” wildlife viewing logo will be placed on the Sterling 

Highway in advance of the East and West Entrances 

• “Welcome to the Skilak WRA” monuments will be constructed at the East and West 

Entrances 

• Information, direction, and location signs for all public use facilities will be provided / 

enhanced along the Skilak Loop Wildlife Drive and Sterling Highway 

• Milepost markers will be provided along the Skilak Loop Wildlife Drive. 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. 

Skilak Loop Road The Service will continue to pursue ongoing efforts to improve road maintenance and year-round public access through a cooperative effort with the Alaska Department of Transportation. 

Immediately. 

Trails The following trails / trail segments will be constructed: 

1. Hideout Mountain Scenic Trail 

• Connect Burney’s Trail to Hideout Mountain Trail via 1.5 mile connector trail 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. 

2. Kenai River Extension Trail 

• Construct 1-mile trail initiating from the end of the existing Kenai River Trail 

southwards towards, but not to, Hidden Creek/Skilak Lake. 

 

3. Skilak Lookout Extension Trail 

• Connect existing Skilak Lookout Trail to existing Vista Trail (1.6 miles) 

 

4. Lower Ohmer Lake Campground Family Loop Trail (1.4 miles) 5. Seven Lakes Long Distance Loop Trail 

• Construct a Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trail off the Skilak Loop Road 

(1.2 miles) 

• Connect the Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trail to Marsh Lake (1.0 mile) 

• Connect Marsh Lake to Egumen/Peterson/Kelly Lakes (2.0 miles) • Connect Egumen/Peterson/Kelly Lakes trail to existing Seven Lakes Trail (2.5 

miles) 

• Connect Seven Lakes Trail to the Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex 

(1.0 mile) 

• Connect the Pack Lake Environmental Education Complex to the Moose Habitat 

Enhancement Loop Trailhead (1.5 miles) 

 
57 

Direction Schedule 

6. Mox / Chatelain Lake Trail 

• Sterling Highway Trailhead Parking Area to Mox Lake • Connect Mox Lake to Chatelain Lake • Connect Mox Lake to existing Seven Lakes Trail 

Vegetation Management Initiate vegetation management activities at the following two (2) locations: 

• Moose Habitat Enhancement Loop Trail northwest of the Pack Lake Environmental 

Education Complex 

• Vegetation Management Interpretive Drive 

Treatment will be conducted on approximately 50 – 100 acres/year when conditions permit. 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. 

Viewing Facilities 

1) Viewing platforms will be constructed at the following five (5) locations: 

• Engineer Lake (west shore) • Kelly Lake (north shore) • Marsh Lake (east shore) • Peterson Lake (south shore) • Upper Ohmer Lake (east shore) 

2) Photo blinds will be constructed at the following two (2) locations: 

• Egumen Lake (north shore) • Rock Lake (east shore) 

3) A viewing tower with spotting scopes will be constructed along the Vegetation Management 

Interpretive Drive. 

4) Spotting scopes will be provided at the following two (2) locations: 

• Hidden Creek Wayside Pullout 

• Skilak Lake / Redoubt Mountain Wayside Pullout 

5) Track Trap 

Refuge biologists, public use specialists, and maintenance personnel will consider and 

evaluate the feasibility of developing a facility at an appropriate location within the Skilak WRA. 

These facilities will be entethe appropriate funding datimmediately. Within 1 year of plan approwill initiate assessments of minimum of four sites; afteevaluations, site will be desand developed before Labothe same year 

Visitor Contact Station A Visitor Contact Station will be constructed at the West Entrance. Information will be provided year-round including periods when the facility is not attended by staff. 

This facility will be entered appropriate funding databaimmediately. 
58 

Direction Schedule Wayside PulloutsAn undeveloped wayside pullout at MP 12.6 along the Skilak Loop Road will be enhanced. 

This facility will be entered appropriate funding databaimmediately. 

Wildlife Management Moose: Managed to provide for a variety of public use opportunities and to achieve natural resource goals. Firearm harvest by permit only; plus re-evaluate moose population objectives as needed. 

Immediately. 

Small Game: During the period October 1 to March 1, each year, harvest of small game by bow 

and arrow will be allowed. A standard 22 caliber rim fire or shotgun youth hunt will be open for a period of 18 days between November 1 and March 1 each year and will include small game species as defined by State of Alaska regulations. The open area remains that area west of the Seven Lakes Trail. The hunt will be open to youth hunters 16 years old or younger accompanied by a licensed hunter who has successfully completed a certified hunter education course if the youth has not, and who is 18 years old or older.

Starting July 1, 2007 

Fur Animals: Harvest will not be allowed. Immediately. 
59 

Bibliography 

Ables, E. D. 1971. Ecology of the red fox in North America. In: Fox, M. W., ed. The wild 

canids. New York: Van Nostand Reinhold Co: 216-235. 

Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development website: 

http://www.dced.state.ak.us. 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

2003. Kenai Peninsula Caribou Management Plan. Soldotna, Alaska. 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 2000. Kenai Peninsula Brown Bear Conservation 

Strategy. Juneau, Alaska. 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

1994. Kenai Peninsula Caribou Management Plan. Soldotna, Alaska. 

Allen, Arthur W. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: beaver. FWS.OBS-82/10.30 (Revised). 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 20 p. 

Barber, Harold L,; Chambers, Robert; Kirkpatrick, Roy; [and others]. 1989. Food. In: Atwater, 

Sally; schnell, Judith, eds. Ruffed grouse. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books: 268-283. 

Brink, Charles holden. 1964. Spruce seed as a food of the squirrels Tamiasciurus hudsonicus and 

Glaucomys sabrinus in interior Alaska. Fairbanks, AK: University of Alaska. 73 p. Thesis. 

Brown, T., C. Ward, and T. Eskelin, 1999. Birding the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. 

Published by the Alaska Natural History Association Anchorage, Alaska. Pp 28. 

Buzzell, Rolfe G.. Settlement Patterns of the Upper Kenai River Area since the American 

Purchase of Alaska. In Supplemental Report: Sterling Highway Archaeology, 1985-1986. Edited 

by Charles C. Holmes. Public-Data File 86-35, Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical 

Surveys. Ms. On file at Office of History and Archaeology, Division of Parks and Outdoor 

Recreation, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage, Alaska. 

Campbell, R. W., N. K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J. M. Cooper, G. W. Kaiser, M. C. E. 

McNall 1990. The birds of British Columbia. Vol. 2. Diurnal birds of prey through woodpeckers. 

R. Br. Columbia Mus., Victoria. 

Carreker, R.G. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: snowshoe hare. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Research and 

Development; Western Energy and Land Use Team, Division of Biological Sciences. 21 p. 

D. E. Sharp, W. O. Vogel 1992. Population status, hunting regulations, hunting activity, and 

harvest of mid-continent Sandhill Cranes, pp. 24-32 in Proc. 1991 N. Am. Crane Workshop (D. 

W. Stahlecker, Ed.). Dist. By Int. Crane Found., Baraboo, WI. 
60 

DeGraaf, Richard M.; Rudis, Deborah D. 1986. New England Wildlife: habitat, natural history, 

and distribution. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-108. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 491 p. 

Del Frate G. G. 1993. Units 7 and 15 Brown Bear. In: S. Abbott, editor. Management Report of 

Survey Inventory Activities 1 July 1990-30 June 1992. ADF&G. Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Proj. 

W-23-4 and W-23-5. Study 4.0 p. 49-57. 

Del Frate G. 2002. Units 7 & 15 black bear management report. Pages 141-154 in C. Healy, 

editor. Black bear management report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 1998-June 2001. 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Proj. 17.0 Juneau, Alaska. 

Grange, Wallace. 1965. Fire and tree growth relationships to snowshoe rabbits. In: Proceedings, 

4th Tall Timbers fire ecology conference; 1965 March 18-19; Tallahassee, FL. Tallahasee, FL: 

Tall Timbers Research Station: 111-123. 

Gullion, Gordon W. 1972. Improving your forested lands for ruffed grouse. Misc. Journal 

Publication 1439. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station. 34 p. 

Heinselman, Miron L. 1973. Fire in the virgin forests of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, 

Minnesota. Quaternary Research. 3: 329-382. 

Hilderbrand, G.V., S.G. Jenkins, C.C. Schwartz, T.A., Hanley, and C.T. Robbins. 2000. Effect of 

seasonal, dietary meat intake on changes in body mass and composition in wild and captive 

brown bears. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78:1623-1631. 

Jacobs, M. J. 1989. An initial population analysis and management strategy of Kenai Peninsula 

brown bears. M.S. thesis, W. Va. Univ., Morgantown. 205 p. 

Litvaitis, John A. 1990. Differential habitat use by sexes of snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus). 

Journal of Mammalogy. 71(4): 520-523. 

McMahan, J. David, and Rolfe G. Buzzell. 1986. Cultural Resource Survey of Alternative F, 

Sterling Highway Mile 46- 55. Office of History and Archaeology Report Number 1. Office of 

History and Archaeology, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Alaska Department of 

Natural Resources, Anchorage, Alaska. 

Melvin, Scott M.; Stephen, W. J. Douglas; Temple, Stanley A. 1990. Population estimates, 

nesting biology, and habitat preferences of Interlake, Manitoba sandhill cranes, Grus Canadensis. 

Canadian Field Naturalist. 104(3): 354-361. 

National Association of Interpretation, website: http://interpnet.com/, 4th paragraph. 

North American Association for Environmental Education web link to State of Kentucky 

legislation: http://www.jefferson.k12.ky.us/Departments/EnvironmentalEd/eedefined.html 

(KRS 157.900 to 157.915). 
61 

Perala, Donald A. 1977. Manager’s handbook for aspen in the north central states. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. NC-36. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest 

Experiment Station. 30 p. 

Pelton, Michael R. 1987. Black bear. In: Chapman, Joseph A.; Feldhamer, George A., eds. Wild 

mammals of North America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press: 504-514. 

Schoen, J. W., R. W. Flynn, L. H. Suring, K. Titus, and L. R. Beier. 1994. Habitat-capability 

model for brown bear in Southeast Alaska. Int. Conf. Bear Res. And Management. 9:327-337. 

Schwartz, C. C., and A. W. Franzmann. 1991. Interrelationship of black bears to moose and 

forest succession in the northern coniferous forest. Wildlife Monographs. 113 p. 

Selinger, J. 2005. Units 7 & 15 caribou management report. Pages 1-19 in C. Brown, editor. 

Caribou management report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2002-30 June 2004. Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game. Juneau, Alaska. 

Selinger, J. 2004. Unit 15A moose management report. Pages 200-208in C. Brown, editor. 

Moose management report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2001-30 June 2003. Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game. Project 1.0. Juneau, Alaska. 

Spraker, T. H. 2001. Units 7 & 15 furbearer management report. Pages 94-114 in C. Healy, 

editor. Furbearer management report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 1997-30 June 

2000. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Project 7.0. Juneau, Alaska. 

Steen, N. C. 1997. Kenai Peninsula Ruffed Grouse Transplant 1995-1997. Final Report. Alaska 

Waterfowl Association. 

Stephens, P.W. and R.O. Peterson. 1984. Wolf-avoidance strategies of moose. Holoarct. Ecol. 

7:239-244.

Timmermann, H.R.; McNicol, J.G. 1988. Moose habitat needs. Forestry and wildlife 

management in the boreal forest – an Ontario workshop; 1987 December 7-9; Thunder Bay, ON. 

In: The Forestry Chronicle. 1988 June: 238-245. 

Unsworth, James W.; Beecham, John J.; Irby, Lynn R. 1989. Female black bear habitat use in 

west-central Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management. 53(3): 668-673. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan. Soldotna, Alaska. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988. Final Environmental Assessment for the Kenai NWR 

Furbearer Management Plan. Soldotna, Alaska. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; animal 

candidate review for listing as endangered or threatened species; proposed rule. 50 CFR Part 17. 

Tuesday, November 15, 1994. Federal Register. 59(219):58982-59028. 
62 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Final Moose/Habitat 

Management Plan. Soldotna, Alaska. 

U.S. Geological Survey. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. Bird Checklists of the 

United States. Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. 

http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/othrdata/chekbird/r7/kenai.htm

U.S. Geological Survey. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Breeding Bird Survey Data 

Retrieval. Species Total For Route 03318: Seven Lakes, Alaska. 

http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/retrieval/summary/sum1.cfm

VanBallenberghe. V. 1982. Growth and development of moose antlers in Alaska. Pp.37-48 in R. 

D. Brown, Ed., Antler Development in Cervidae. Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute. 

Kingsville. TX. 

Viereck, L., C. Dyrness, A. Batten, and K. Wenzlick, 1992. The Alaska vegetation classification. 

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-286. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR.

Weeden, R. B.. 1965. Grouse and ptarmigan in Alaska: their ecology and management. Alaska 

Dep. Fish Game, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Project Report, Vol. V: Project W–6–R–5, 

Work Plan 1. 
APPENDIX A 

DECISION NOTICE (original) 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

SKILAK WILDLIFE RECREATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN 

KENAI NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

This notice documents my decision concerning management of the Skilak Wildlife Recreation 

Area (Skilak WRA) located within the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Kenai NWR). It 

identifies the purpose and need for the federal action, alternatives considered, public outreach, 

which alternative to implement, the rationale for that decision, and a brief summary of why the 

preferred alternative will not have a significant impact on the human environment. 

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR FEDERAL ACTION 

The purpose of this federal action is to develop an updated management plan for the Skilak 

WRA. The management plan identifies wildlife viewing, interpretation, photography, and other 

wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities; development of compatible facilities; and 

implementation of related programs. 

The Kenai NWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan (Conservation Plan) approved in 1985 

provides direction to manage the Skilak area “to provide enhanced opportunities for wildlife 

viewing.” To implement that direction, a wildlife management plan was developed in 1986, and 

a public use facilities plan was approved in 1988. In an ongoing effort to fulfill management 

direction identified in the Conservation Plan, the Service prepared a Skilak WRA Draft 

Management Plan (Draft Plan) and Environmental Assessment (EA) that evaluated three 

alternatives and analyzed potential impacts on the human environment. The EA was developed 

to ensure that the Refuge fulfilled the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) of 1969. 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND ANALYZED 

The EA analyzed the impacts of three alternatives for management of the Skilak WRA: 

Alternative A (No Action Alternative) 

Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, described what would happen with continuation of 

current management as directed by a wildlife management plan (1986) and public use facilities 

plan (1988). The No Action Alternative is required by NEPA, and served as a baseline against 

which to compare the other two alternatives. 

Alternative A would continue to implement existing plans for the area and maintain existing 

administrative boundaries (approximately 44,000-acres). It would enhance wildlife viewing and 

photography opportunities by constructing additional public use facilities including five trails (9-

miles in length) and three wayside pullouts. The Refuge would manage habitat to sustain 
specific moose population objectives, limit moose hunting by permit, and small game by bow 

and arrow only. Firearm use would be prohibited near roads and other public use facilities (or on 

approximately 3,200-acres) to ensure public safety. Alternative A would enhance environmental 

education and interpretation opportunities by constructing five bulletin boards and interpretive 

panels at six sites. A nature center would also be constructed. Alternative A would provide 

recreation support facilities by expanding one campground, constructing three new parking 

areas, and constructing a visitor contact station. Some rehabilitation of existing public use 

facilities would take place. The Skilak Loop Road and Sterling Highway intersections would be 

redesigned to conform to state and federal highway standards, and the Skilak Loop Road and all 

parking areas and wayside pullouts would be paved. 

Alternative B (Preferred Alternative) 

Implementation of Alternative B, the Service’s Preferred Alternative, would increase the 

administrative boundaries to approximately 52,750-acres. It would enhance wildlife viewing and 

photography opportunities by constructing a greater number and diversity of public use facilities 

than that proposed under Alternative A including six trails (29.7-miles in length), eight viewing 

facilities (blinds, platforms, etc), nine spotting scopes, and one wayside pullout. The Refuge 

would manage habitat to enhance wildlife viewing opportunities as opposed to specific moose 

population objectives. Status quo management of moose hunting opportunities would be 

permitted on 47,120-acres. Firearm use associated with permitted moose hunts would be 

prohibited on 5,620-acres to ensure public safety at and around a greater number of facilities. An 

existing small game archery hunt would be maintained. Alternative B would enhance 

environmental education and interpretation opportunities by constructing six bulletin boards, 

interpretive panels at ten sites, and a self-guided interpretive drive and trail. An environmental 

education complex consisting of a boreal lands research and land management training facility 

and nature center would be constructed. The number and diversity of environmental education 

“ranger” programs and outreach materials would be increased. Alternative B would provide 

recreation support facilities by expanding one campground, and constructing one day use area, 

four walk-in tent campsites, three parking lots, five sanitary facilities, and a visitor contact 

station. Some rehabilitation of existing public use facilities would take place. The Skilak Loop 

Road and Sterling Highway intersections would be redesigned to conform to state and federal 

highway standards; the Skilak Loop Road and all parking areas and wayside pullouts would be 

paved, and year-round maintenance would be conducted to facilitate public use. The road would 

be renamed the Skilak Loop Wildlife Drive. 

Alternative C 

Implementation of Alternative C would consist of management actions described under 

Alternative B plus a general entry firearm hunt of small game and fur animals would be allowed 

on 35,570-acres. Firearm use would be prohibited on 17,180-acres to ensure public safety at and 

around a greater number of facilities. 

PUBLIC OUTREACH, REVIEW, AND COMMENT 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) completed the Draft Plan and EA in October 2006. 

Approximately 2,500 copies were distributed to individuals and organizations that had expressed 

an interest in receiving Kenai NWR planning-related documents. One hundred and thirty-nine 

printed copies were mailed to federal, state, and local officials; government and quasi-
government agencies; national and regional non-governmental organizations, and others, and 

2,300 copies were distributed on compact discs. 

In the Anchorage area, notices of availability were distributed to 16 radio stations, 3 television 

stations, and 3 newspapers. In the Kenai Peninsula area, notices were distributed to 10 radio 

stations, 2 television stations, and 3 newspapers. An electronic version of the plan was made 

available on the Kenai NWR planning website, and a Skilak email address was created. 

Presentations were made to the Board of Game and the Friends of Alaska National Wildlife 

Refuges. 

The Draft Plan and EA were made available for public review and comment during a 30-day 

period ending November 17, 2006. Eighty-one responses were received by mail, email, and 

telephone before the deadline. The majority of responses came from private citizens located in 

the greater Soldotna-Kenai area. Sixteen non-governmental organizations, one federal agency, 

two local businesses, and the State of Alaska also responded. 

Just over half of all respondents expressed support for or opposition to a specific alternative. Of 

those, the majority supported Alternative B or a modified version of Alternative B. A smaller 

proportion expressed support for Alternative A or modified version of Alternative A. The next 

smallest proportion expressed opposition to all three alternatives. A few respondents specifically 

indicated that they opposed Alternative C, and few others indicated support for a modified 

version of C. Substantive comments centered on four themes: firearm use and hunting, Skilak 

Loop Road maintenance, threats to wildlife and wildlife corridors, and facilities. 

Firearm Use and Hunting Opportunities

The single most common opinion expressed among the responses was support for retaining 

existing firearm restrictions. Respondents who favored continuing to restrict firearms expressed 

concern that wildlife viewers and other non-consumptive users needed 

a place where they can recreate free from the perceived dangers associated with hunting. A few 

respondents indicated their concern that calls to expand hunting in the Skilak WRA would lead 

to expanded hunting opportunities contrary to a wildlife viewing area. 

Respondents who favored relaxing firearm restrictions and/or expanding hunting opportunities 

typically suggested that conflicts with other users are unlikely because hunting takes place in the 

fall and winter when non-consumptive recreation use is low. Most advocates of expanded 

hunting called for limited expansion in the form of small game opportunities and smaller buffer 

zones, although a few called for virtually unrestricted hunting. 

Skilak Loop Road Maintenance

Maintenance of the Skilak Loop Road was the second-most prevalent topic in respondents’ 

comments. Most respondents who commented on this topic were strongly opposed to paving the 

road. They suggested that paving would encourage drivers to travel at unsafe speeds and 

collisions with wildlife and other vehicles would result. A few respondents worried that the 

Service would restrict use of the road if it were to take over management responsibility from the 

State of Alaska. 

Among the respondents that explicitly supported paving, half suggested the Service should 

consider speed control measures such as speed bumps or increased speed limit enforcement. The 
main reason given for supporting paving was decreased wear and tear on vehicles and trailers. 

Threats to Wildlife and Wildlife Corridors

Respondents who expressed concerns about wildlife impacts typically suggested that one or 

more formal “wildlife movement corridors” be identified – one west of Skilak Lake Loop Road 

to the refuge’s western most boundary, and one along the north shore of Skilak Lake. They 

suggested facilities development should be limited or prohibited in these areas to minimize 

adverse impacts to wildlife. They cited the vital location of the Skilak WRA within the larger 

Kenai Peninsula region, and the potential cumulative impacts to wildlife from current and future 

off-refuge developments, and recreation facilities. 

Facilities

Only a relatively small proportion of respondents commented specifically on visitor facilities. 

Among those that did, opinions regarding the collection of visitor facilities and upgrades proposed 

in the draft plan tended to be negative. Most of those respondents felt that proposed facilities were 

unnecessary or too numerous. A few suggested management resources should be aimed at 

improved maintenance of existing infrastructure rather than building more. 

DECISION 

Alternative B (Preferred Alternative) with Modification

Based on the EA completed for the Skilak WRA Draft Plan, and comments received during the 

public review period, it is my decision to select a modified version of Alternative B (Preferred 

Alternative) for implementation. The following provisions will modify and be applied to 

Alternative B (Preferred Alternative) as described in the Draft Management Plan and 

Environmental Assessment: 

Administrative Boundaries 

The following language will describe the administrative boundaries of the Skilak WRA: 

“Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area – bounded by a line at the eastern most 

boundary of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Mile 55 Sterling Highway), then 

southerly along the south bank of the Kenai River to its confluence with Skilak 

Lake, then westerly along the north shore of Skilak Lake to Lower Skilak Lake 

campground, then northerly along the Lower Skilak Lake Campground Road and 

the Skilak Lake Road to its westernmost junction with the Sterling Highway (Mile 

75.1), then easterly along the Sterling Highway to the point of beginning.”

Facilities 

The following facilities will not be further planned, designed, enhanced, rehabilitated, or 

developed: 

 A. Trails 

• Bottenintnin Lake Group Day Use Area Loop Trail (4.0 miles) 

• Lower Skilak Lake Campground to Blizzard Lake Trail (1.9 miles) 

• Blizzard Lake Family Loop Trail (1.3 miles) 

• Connector trail (0.5 mile) from Blizzard Lake Family Loop Trail to Moose Habitat 

Enhancement Loop Trailhead on the Skilak Loop Wildlife Drive 
• Blizzard Lake to Upper Skilak Lake Campground Trail (3.9 miles) 

• Connector trail (0.7 mile) from Upper Skilak Lake Campground to Lower Ohmer Lake 

Family Loop Trail 

• Connector trail (2.2 miles) from existing Hidden Creek Trail to existing Skilak 

Lookout Trail 

B. Other 

• Day Use Area at Bottenintnin Lake (including boat launch, bulletin board/trail kiosk, 

picnic area, sanitary facilities) 

• Hardened “walk-in” campsite located on Skilak Lake Long Distance Trail between 

Blizzard Lake and Upper Skilak Campground 

Hunting Opportunities 

In addition to the permitted moose hunt and small game archery hunt allowed under Alternative 

B, a shotgun only youth hunt of hare and grouse is allowed up to a 9 day period between 

November and March west of the Seven Lakes Trail. The specifics of the hunt will be 

determined through a cooperative effort with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and 

implemented, if possible, through Alaska Board of Game regulations. 

Skilak Loop Road 

The Service will continue to pursue ongoing efforts to improve road maintenance and year-round 

public access through a cooperative effort with the Alaska Department of Transportation. 

Wildlife Movement Corridor 

A wildlife movement corridor is identified along the north shore of Skilak Lake within the 

administrative boundaries of the Skilak WRA. The 1⁄2-mile wide corridor, from Lower Skilak 

Lake Campground to the outlet of the Kenai River into Skilak Lake, will be free of development 

except for the existing Lower Skilak Lake Campground and Upper Skilak Lake Campground 

which will remain as currently designed, and maintained to facilitate continued public use. 

RATIONALE FOR DECISION 

A modified version of Alternative B was selected because I believe it best achieves the purpose 

and need for the federal action identified above, and the general management direction for the 

Skilak WRA as identified in Kenai Refuge’s Conservation Plan. Furthermore, I believe it 

addresses the substantive concerns raised during the public review period in the most appropriate 

manner while fulfilling the Service’s legal mandates. 

Administrative Boundary Adjustments and Facilities Development

My decision to revise the Skilak WRA’s administrative boundaries as described in Alternative B 

of the Draft Plan and EA, and the list of public use facilities to be developed on those lands is 

due to concerns raised by the State of Alaska and others. Of compelling interest to the Service 

was the contention that the 8,243-acre area west of the Skilak Loop Road to the refuge’s western 

most boundary offered few developed wildlife-viewing, interpretation, and photography 

opportunities and that including those lands within the administrative boundaries would further 

reduce firearm hunting opportunities. 

 
I believe the revised administrative boundaries language previously described is appropriate 

because: 

• Few public use facilities were proposed for development on these lands (i.e., one trail and 

one day use area at Bottenintnin Lake); 

• removal of these lands from the administrative boundaries of the Skilak WRA would 

have limited adverse impact on wildlife viewing, interpretation, and photography 

opportunities throughout the area despite removal of identified public use facilities on 

these lands; 

• the potential for beneficial impacts on other wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities 

(i.e., hunting opportunities) is desired; and, 

• removing these public use facilities will also address concerns raised by conservation 

organizations and members of the general public regarding wildlife movement through 

these lands. 

Wildlife Corridors and Facilities Development 

My decision to identify a wildlife movement corridor along the north shore of Skilak Lake and 

revise the list of public use facilities to be developed as described in Alternative B of the Draft 

Plan and EA is due to concerns raised by some conservation organizations and others. Of 

compelling interest to the Service was the contention that lands north of Skilak Lake facilitate 

east/west wildlife movement within the refuge and that facilities proposed for development on 

these lands would result in increased human-wildlife encounters that would have direct and 

indirect adverse impacts on wildlife. 

I believe the revised facilities language previously described is appropriate because: 

• The facilities proposed for development on these lands (i.e., trails and one walk-in tent 

campsite) are similar to those proposed elsewhere within the Skilak WRA; 

• removal of these facilities from the list of proposed development projects would have 

limited adverse impact on wildlife viewing, interpretation, photography, and other 

wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities; and, 

• the potential for beneficial impacts on wildlife, particularly brown bear – a species of 

special concern – is desired. 

Hunting Opportunities

My decision to revise the proposed language for hunting opportunities as described in 

Alternative B of the Draft Plan and EA is due to concerns raised by the State of Alaska, some 

hunting organizations, and others. Of particular interest to the Service was the suggestion that 

additional firearm hunting opportunities could be provided in the area if such opportunities were 

limited in time and space to minimize conflicts with non-consumptive users. 

I believe the revised hunting language previously described is appropriate because: 

• The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act specifically directs the Service 

to “provide increased opportunities for families to experience compatible wildlifedependent recreation, particularly opportunities for parents and their children to safely 

engage in traditional outdoor activities, such as fishing and hunting”; 

• a dedicated youth hunt is not currently provided on the refuge; and, 
• any adverse impacts a youth hunt would have on wildlife viewing, interpretation, and 

photography opportunities would be minor considering the limited geographic scope (the 

western half of the area), duration (9 days per year), timing (November – March), and 

overall low harvest numbers of grouse and hares. 

Skilak Loop Road Maintenance

My decision to revise the language for the Skilak Loop Road as described in Alternative B of the 

Draft Plan and EA is due to the results of the analysis conducted for the proposed action and 

concerns raised by members of the general public. Of particular interest to the Service is the 

impact the action might have on wildlife. 

I believe the revised Skilak Loop Road maintenance language previously described is 

appropriate because: 

• Actions taken to hard surface the road (i.e., chip seal, pave, etc.) would not be 

implemented unless further environmental review and analysis is conducted and 

additional opportunities for public comment specific to the action would take place 

before any decision is made; 

• not paving the road would have limited adverse impact on wildlife viewing, 

interpretation, photography, and other wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities; and, 

• the potential for beneficial impacts on wildlife is desired. 

In short, I believe a modified version of Alternative B is the best approach to take to make the 

Skilak WRA a premier wildlife recreation area with enhanced opportunities for wildlife viewing, 

interpretation, and photography for present and future generations. 

WHY THE SELECTED ALTERNATIVE WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT 

The following summary reviews impact considerations associated with implementing Alternative 

B (Preferred Alternative) with modifications. The EA provides detailed consideration of the 

factors supporting the determination of non-significance. 

Air Quality

Impacts were qualitatively assessed using air pollution emissions as indicators. Under modified 

Alternative B, air quality will decline throughout the Skilak Loop Road and Vegetation 

Management Drive corridors throughout the life of the plan, and at burn site locations for 

relatively short periods of time when such activities are conducted. Air quality benefits obtained 

from paving the Skilak Loop Road (i.e., reduction of particulate matter) will not be realized. 

However, regionally, throughout the Skilak WRA, air quality will not be adversely affected. 

Soil Resources

Impacts were qualitatively assessed using physical soil characteristics as indicators. Under 

modified Alternative B, physical soil characteristics will decline at construction sites and 

throughout the Skilak Loop Road and Vegetation Management Drive corridors throughout the 

life of the plan, and at burn sites for relatively short periods of time. Adverse impacts resulting 

from paving the Skilak Loop Road (i.e., compaction, loss of function, etc.) will not occur 

because of modifications made to Alternative B. Regionally, throughout the Skilak WRA, soils 

will not be adversely affected. 
Water Quality

Impacts were qualitatively assessed using sedimentation and non-point source pollution as 

indicators. Under modified Alternative B, improved road maintenance will not likely affect 

water quality beyond current conditions. 

Vegetation (Wildlife Habitat)

Impacts were quantitatively assessed using acres of habitat lost as an indicator. Under modified 

Alternative B, the amount of habitat will be reduced at construction sites, and trail and road 

corridors throughout the life of the plan, and at burn sites for relatively short periods of time. 

Adverse impacts resulting from trail and other public use facility construction at Bottenintnin 

Lake and along the north shore of Skilak Lake will not occur. Regionally, throughout the Skilak 

WRA, habitat will not be adversely affected. 

Wildlife

Impacts were qualitatively assessed using abundance as an indicator. Under modified 

Alternative B, wildlife abundance of some species will decline at project sites including facility 

development sites, and trail and road corridors throughout the life of the plan due to impacts 

associated with construction, habitat loss, and public use disturbance. Additional declines will be 

observed at burn sites for relatively short periods of time due to changes in habitat condition, but 

as succession occurs abundance of some species will improve. Individuals of snowshoe hare, 

and spruce and ruffed grouse will be taken in the western portion of the area due to 

implementation of a youth hunt. Adverse impacts resulting from trail construction around 

Bottenintnin Lake and along the north shore of Skilak Lake; and from paving the Skilak Loop 

Drive will not occur due to modifications made to Alternative B. Regionally, throughout the 

Skilak WRA, wildlife abundance will not be adversely affected. 

Public Access

Impacts were qualitatively assessed using number and condition of access-related facilities as 

indicators. Under modified Alternative B, public access will improve throughout the life of the 

plan and into the future at locations where new boat launches, parking areas, roads, and trails are 

constructed. Beneficial impacts resulting from trail construction around Bottenintnin Lake and 

along the north shore of Skilak Lake will not occur due to modifications made to Alternative B. 

Regionally, throughout the Skilak WRA, public access will improve from implementing the 

action. 

Recreation Opportunities

Impacts were qualitatively assessed using number and type of public use facilities, and diversity 

of recreation activities available as indicators. Under modified Alternative B, a diversity of 

recreation opportunities including wildlife viewing, environmental education, interpretation, 

hunting, and camping will improve throughout the life of the plan and into the future at locations 

where new facilities are constructed and new programs are implemented. Although 

implementation of a youth hunt will further diversify the types of recreation opportunities 

provided for in the area, some non-consumptive recreation users (i.e., wildlife viewers, etc.) may 

be displaced in the western portion of the area during the hunt. Beneficial impacts resulting from 

development of a day use facility at Bottenintnin Lake will not occur due to modifications made 

to Alternative B. Regionally, throughout the Skilak WRA, recreation opportunities will improve 
from implementing the action. 

CONCLUSION 

Based on the analysis documented in the environmental assessment and as amended by this 

decision notice due to modifications made to Alternative B, and with due consideration given to 

comments from the public and through consultation with the State of Alaska, I have determined 

that the selected alternative, with modification, does not constitute a major federal action that 

will have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment, and will not violate any 

federal, state, or local environmental protection law. Based on the foregoing, it is determined 

that an environmental impact statement is not required for this project. The selected alternative, 

with modification, may be implemented as soon as practicable. 

Recommended: __/s/________________________________________12/6/06_____

Robin L. West, Refuge Manager Date 

Kenai National Wildlife Refuge 

Approved: __/s/_________________________________________12/7/06____ 

Thomas O. Melius, Regional Director Date 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
Errata Sheet 

Page 4 – Coordination with the State of Alaska 

The paragraph will read: 

In 1982, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the Alaska Department 

of Fish and Game (ADF&G) signed a Master Memorandum of Understanding 

that defines the cooperative management roles of each agency and identifies the 

framework for cooperation between the two agencies. In this agreement the 

agencies recognized the Service as the agency with the responsibility to conserve 

fish and wildlife and their habitats and regulate human use on Service lands. The 

ADF&G was recognized as the agency with the primary responsibility to manage 

fish and resident wildlife within the State of Alaska. Furthermore, the 

Department agreed to manage fish and resident wildlife populations in their 

natural diversity on Service lands. The Service and ADF&G share a concern for 

all fish and wildlife resources and their habitats, and both agencies are engaged in 

extensive fish and wildlife conservation, management, and protection programs. 
Response to Substantive Comments 

Not Addressed in the Decision 

Compatibility Determinations

Comment: Defenders of Wildlife stated: “Every proposal within the Plan is a new or expanded 

use, or infrastructure that supports a use of the KNWR and thus requires a compatibility 

determination. The FWS is required to allow the public an opportunity to review compatibility 

determinations.” 

Response: The National Wildlife Refuge Administration Act of 1966, as amended, requires that 

all uses of national wildlife refuges be determined to be compatible with the specific mandated 

purposes of the refuge, and National Wildlife Refuge System mission, before being permitted. 

The Act also allows that compatibility determinations in existence on October 9, 1997, may 

remain in effect until and unless modified, except that wildlife-dependent recreational uses (such 

as hunting and wildlife viewing) must be re-evaluated at least every 15 years and in concert with 

revisions of comprehensive conservation plans, and non-wildlife dependent recreational uses 

must be re-evaluated at least every 10 years. Additionally, compatibility determinations are also 

to be revised when conditions under which the use occurs change significantly. Current wildlifedependent recreational use compatibility determinations for Kenai NWR do not expire until 

2012; however, all compatibility determinations on the Refuge are being revised as part of 

completing a revised comprehensive conservation plan. These should be available for public 

comment within a few months. The proposed changes to public uses included in the Skilak 

WRA Draft Plan were not deemed significant by themselves, when viewing the Refuge as a 

whole, to warrant new compatibility reviews specific to this small portion of the Refuge. 

Invasive Species

Comment: The Service received numerous comments from conservation organizations and 

members of the general public about the increasing threat of invasive species due to additional 

facilities development and public use. 

Response: The Service agrees invasive species are a threat and that facilities development and 

pubic use may facilitate establishment of new populations. The Service will continue ongoing 

efforts to monitor invasive species and take appropriate actions, as needed, to counter adverse 

impacts associated with them. 

Skilak Loop Road

Comment: The State of Alaska questioned average daily traffic figures: “The first paragraph 

cites average daily traffic figures from DOT/PF [Department of Transportation and Public 

Facilities]. This average daily use represents primarily peak summer use along the short, eastern 

segment of the road, and cannot be extrapolated to create a year around traffic estimate. 

Response: The Service agrees that the data obtained from DOT/PF was collected at the 

intersection of the Skilak Lake Road and Hidden Lake Road (MP 15.3) in the eastern portion of 

the Skilak WRA, but according to DOT/PF in their Annual Traffic Volume Report “raw data 

from coverage counts [is] adjusted for seasonal variation [emphasis added] [and] is the basis for 

determining” annual average daily traffic figures. DOT/PF collects data at three additional sites 
along the Skilak Lake Road: at the junction with the Upper Skilak Campground Road (MP 

10.4), Lower Skilak Campground Road (MP 5.2), and Sterling Highway (MP 0). According to 

DOT/PF data, annual average daily traffic figures at each point along the Skilak Lake Road, 

except at the junction with the Lower Skilak Campground Road, have increased between 1996 

and 2004. The Service contends the plan accurately demonstrates increasing use of the road. 

Vegetation Management

Comment: The State of Alaska requested “the final plan clarify that implementation will be fully 

linked to the moose population objectives developed by the Service and ADF&G to provide for 

healthy moose populations as well as opportunities for recreation.” 

Response: The Service contends it currently has the financial and human resources to conduct 

vegetation management activities on approximately 50 – 100 acres/year when conditions allow, 

but it does not believe such activities are sufficient to influence moose populations. 
Appendix B 

DECISION NOTICE (amended) 

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 

SKILAK WILDLIFE RECREATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN 

KENAI NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 

U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

Decision 

Based on the my desire to provide consistency in regulation between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service) and the State of Alaska (State), and to continue the management of Skilak 

Wildlife Recreation Area (Skilak WRA) under the recently completed Skilak WRA Final 

Management Plan, it is my decision to amend the Administrative Boundaries and Hunting 

Opportunities sections of the Decision Notice Finding of No Significant Impact for the Skilak 

WRA Management Plan (dated December 7, 2006) as described in the following two paragraphs. 

Administrative Boundaries: The 497 new acres encompassed within the Skilak WRA Final 

Management Plan will not be included. The boundary will remain as it was in Alternative A of 

the environmental assessment. 

Hunting Opportunities: In addition to the permitted moose hunt and small game archery hunt 

allowed under Alternative B, a youth hunt for small game will be open for a period of 18 days 

between November 1 and March 1 each year. Standard 22 caliber rim fire or shotgun will be 

allowed for small game species as defined by State of Alaska regulations. The open area 

remains that area west of the Seven Lakes Trail. The hunt will be open to youth hunters 16 years 

old or younger accompanied by a licensed hunter who has successfully completed a certified 

hunter education course if the youth has not, and who is 18 years old or older. 

I find that my amended decision is within the range of alternatives evaluated in the 

environmental assessment (EA). Alternative C proposed hunting in the Skilak WRA as a general 

entry firearm hunt of small game and fur animals on 35,570 acres and prohibited hunting on 

17,180 acres to ensure public safety. The boundary of the Skilak WRA will remain as described 

in Alternative A. I find that these changes will have no significant impact to the human 

environment. I also find that these changes will add to the Service’s ability to manage the Skilak 

WRA in a cooperative manner to meet public needs and the State’s management objectives. 

Rationale for Amended Decision 

On December 7, 2006, I adopted a modified version of Alternative B (preferred alternative) of 

the EA that analyzed alternatives for management of the Skilak WRA on the Kenai National 

Wildlife Refuge. The Hunting Opportunities section of that decision states that the “specifics of 

the hunt will be determined through a cooperative effort with the Alaska Department of Fish and 
Game and implemented, if possible, through the Alaska Board of Game regulations.” This 

statement is supported by a Master Memorandum of Understanding between the Service and the 

State. Wherein the Service agrees to use the State’s regulatory process to the maximum extent 

allowed by Federal law in developing new or modified existing Federal Regulations or proposing 

changes in existing Federal regulations governing or effecting the taking of fish or wildlife on 

Service lands in Alaska. 

The Finding of No Significant Impact of December 7, 2006 was made without the ability to 

know what action if any would be taken by the Alaska Board of Game. Knowing now what the 

Board of Game decision is, I believe the public interest will be best served by providing the 

consistency in Federal and State rules described above. 

____/s/____________________________________________ _____May 11, 2007_______

Thomas O. Melius, Regional Director Date 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Region 
Appendix C 

Alaska Board of Game Regulatory Proposal 

ALASKA BOARD OF FISHERIES AND ALASKA BOARD OF GAME 

REGULATION PROPOSAL FORM 

PO BOX 25526, JUNEAU, ALASKA 99802-5526 

BOARD OF FISHERIES REGULATIONS BOARD OF GAME REGULATIONS 

Fishing Area Game Management Unit 

(GMU)

15A 

Subsistence Personal Use Hunting Trapping 

Sport Commercial Subsistence Other 

JOINT BOARD REGULATIONS Resident

Advisory 

Committee

Regional Council Rural Nonresident

Please answer all questions to the best of your ability. All answers will be printed in the proposal packets along with the 

proposer's name (address and phone numbers will not be published). Use separate forms for each proposal. 

1. Alaska Administrative Code Number 

5 AAC 

Regulation Book Page 

No. 70 

2. What is the problem you would like the Board to address? 

On Thursday, December 7, 2006, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Regional 

Director signed a Decision Notice – a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) – for 

the Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area (Skilak WRA) Draft Management Plan and 

Environmental Assessment. Pursuant to the plan, the USFWS is seeking Board of Game 

action to implement hunting regulations proposed for the area. The proposal, as 

submitted, has been developed in cooperation with Alaska Department of Fish and Game 

(ADF&G) representatives and is supported by the USFWS Alaska Regional Director and 

ADF&G Commissioner. 

3. What will happen if this problem is not solved? 

Should the Board not make the proposed changes, new youth hunting opportunities may 

not be realized. 

4. What solution do you prefer? In other words, if the Board adopted your solution, what would the new regulation say? 

Hunting regulations for the Skilak WRA adopted in 1987 (small game hunting by bow and 

arrow from October 1 to March 1, and moose hunting by permit when certain conditions 

are met) would continue. In addition, a shotgun only youth hunt of hare and grouse is 

allowed up to a nine day period between November and March west of the Seven Lakes 

Trail. The boundary description for the Skilak WRA would also change and add 497-acres 

of land adjacent to the Kenai River. The proposed new language to describe this State 

restricted area would be: 

“Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area [SKILAK LOOP MANAGEMENT AREA] – bounded by a line at 

the eastern most boundary of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Mile 55 Sterling 

Highway) [BOUNDED BY A LINE BEGINNING AT THE EASTERNMOST JUNCTION OF THE STERLING 

HIGHWAY AND THE SKILAK LOOP ROAD (MILE 58), then southerly along the south bank of the 

Kenai River to its confluence with Skilak Lake, then westerly along the north shore of 

Skilak Lake to Lower Skilak Lake campground, then northerly along the Lower Skilak 

Lake campground road and the Skilak Loop Road to its westernmost junction with the 

Sterling Highway (Mile 75.1), then easterly along the Sterling Highway to the point of 

beginning, is closed to hunting and trapping except that small game may be taken from 
October 1 through March 1 by bow and arrow only and moose by permit only. In addition, 

that portion of the area west of a line from the access road from the Sterling Highway 

to Kelly Lake, the Seven Lakes Trail, and the access road from Engineer Lake to Skilak 

Lake Road, and north of the Skilak Lake Road, is open to hunting of hare and grouse 

for nine consecutive days beginning on the first Saturday in November each year by 

hunters between the ages of 10 and 17. Eligible hunters must have a Basic Hunter 

Education Certificate and be accompanied by an adult 18 years old or older. Only the 

youth may hunt and only shotguns using size 4 birdshot or smaller may be used. The 

daily bag limit is 5 snowshoe hare, 5 spruce grouse, and 1 ruffed grouse for the youth 

hunt.” 

5. Does your proposal address improving the quality of the resource harvested or products produced? If so, how? 

The proposed changes allow for limited additional hunting opportunities in the area 

without significantly impacting the primary objectives of the area of managing for 

enhanced wildlife viewing opportunities. 

6. Solutions to difficult problems benefit some people and hurt others: 

A. Who is likely to benefit if your solution is adopted? 

Young hunters will have a new area to hunt. 

B. Who is likely to suffer if your solution is adopted? 

Other users in the area at the time the hunt is offered will likely include ice 

fishermen, dog mushers, and winter hikers and skiers. 

7. List any other solutions you considered and why you 

rejected them. 

DO NOT WRITE HERE 

The Skilak Wildlife Recreation Area 

Management Plan is the result of over a year 

of efforts between the USFWS and ADF&G and 

replaces the current management plan for the 

area. Other alternatives were evaluated 

including status quo management (no 

additional hunting opportunities) and 

opening over half of the area to small game 

and fur animal hunting with firearms by all 

hunters. Additionally, alternatives 

evaluated other boundary adjustments and a 

variety of facility development scenarios. 

The preferred alternative of the Draft Plan, 

at the request of the State of Alaska, was 

amended to include the youth hunt 

opportunity and only one minor boundary 

extension (497-acres to the east vs. the 

proposed addition of the 497-acres plus 

8,243-acres to the west of Skilak Lake Road 

to the westernmost refuge boundary). 

Submitted 

By: 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Todd Logan, Regional Chief, National Wildlife Refuge System /s/ 

12/8/06 

Individual or Group 

1011 E. Tudor Road Anchorage, AK 99503-6199 

Address City, State ZIP Code 

 (907) 786-3667 Todd_logan@fws.gov 

Home Phone Work Phone Email 
Appendix D 
Appendix E: Preparers 

Name Agency / Title Expertise / Function Degree(s) ExpRob Campellone USFWS Regional Office / 

Natural Resources Planner 

Planning Team Leader BS Environmental Science 

MS Natural Resources Management 

Nat(10

Brian Glaspell USFWS Regional Office / 

Social Scientist 

Recreation Management BS Geography 

MS Natural Resources Management PhD Recreation / Wilderness Management 

SocLanMa

Bill Kent USFWS Kenai Refuge / 

Supervisory Park Ranger 

Visitor Services Management BS Outdoor Recreation / Park 

Management 

RefMaEnf

Mark Laker USFWS Kenai Refuge / 

Ecologist / Biometrician 

GIS Analysis BS Marine Biology 

MS Fish Biology 

Fish (8), 

Thomas McDonough ADF&G / Wildlife 

Biologist 

Wildlife Biology BS Zoology 

MS Wildlife Biology 

WilMa

Debbie Steen USFWS Regional Office / 

Chief of Visitor Services 

Visitor Services Specialist BS Forestry 

BS Recreation Management BS Natural Resources Management 

NatMaMaMa

George Weekley ADF&G / Natural 

Resources Specialist 

State Coordination / Recreation Management 

BS Environmental Science MS Recreation / Natural Resources Management 

NatMa
This page intentionally left blank.