Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan

Summary

Kanuti

National Wildlife Refuge

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
The comprehensive conservation plan details program planning levels that are substantially greater than 

current budget allocations and, as such, is for strategic planning and program prioritization purposes only. 

This plan does not constitute a commitment for staffing increases or funding for future refuge-specific land 

acquisitions, construction projects, or operational and maintenance increases.

Front cover photograph: Steve Hillebrand, USFWS. Beaver, or “noye’e” in Koyukon Athabascan, are common 

throughout Kanuti Refuge.

Back cover photograph: Steve Hillebrand, USFWS. Short-tailed weasel, called “koghozene” in Koyukon 

Athabascan.
1

Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan

for the

Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge

Summary

September 2008

Prepared by:

Region 7

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Refuge Manager

Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge

101 12th Ave, Rm 262

Fairbanks, AK 99701-6237

(907) 456-0329

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Division of Conservation, Planning & Policy

1011 E. Tudor Road, MS 231

Anchorage, Alaska 99503

(907) 786-3357

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS 

If you have any questions or comments about this plan, please contact us at one of the 

following locations: 
2

The Mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System

The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is to administer a national 

network of lands and waters for the conservation, management 

and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant 

resources and their habitats within the United States for the 

benefit of present and future generations of Americans.

National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 

The Purposes of Kanuti Refuge

The major purposes include:

“...(i) to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity including, 

but not limited to, white-fronted geese and other waterfowl and migratory birds, moose, caribou 

(including participation in coordinated ecological studies and management of the Western Arctic 

caribou herd) and furbearers;

(ii) to fulfill the international treaty obligations of the United States with respect to fish and wildlife 

and their habitats;

(iii) to provide, in a manner consistent with the purposes set forth in subparagraphs (i) and (ii), the 

opportunity for continued subsistence uses by local residents; and

(iv) to ensure, to the maximum extent practicable and in a manner consistent with the purposes set 

forth in paragraph (i), water quality and necessary water quantity within the refuge.”

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 

The Mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with 

others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and 

their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.
3

Contents

Introduction to the CCP 

Refuge Description 

Location 

Establishment

Planning Procedures 

Requirements 

The Planning Process

Refuge Assets 

Biological Resources 

Human Uses 

Special Values

Refuge Vision 

Issues 

What are Issues? 

Kanuti Refuge Issues 

How does the Refuge address the Issues?

Alternatives

Kanuti Refuge Management

Fish, Wildlife, and Habitat Management

Fire Management

Subsistence Management

Predator Management

Biological Integrity Policy

Public Use

Access

Refuge Infrastructure and Administration

Climate Change 

Management Categories Table

Refuge Goals and Objectives 

Goal 1 

Goal 2 

Goal 3

Goal 4

Goal 5

Goal 6

Funding and Personnel Requirements 

Implementation and Monitoring

Step-down Plans 

Partnership Opportunities 

Monitoring and Evaluation 

Plan Amendment and Revision

 

Wild North Photography/USFWS 

4

5

5

5

6

6

7

8

8

8

9

12

12

12

13

14

15

18

19

19

19

20

20

21

21

21

22

23

31

31

35

36

37

38

39

40

42

42

44

45

45
Introduction to the CCP

What are comprehensive conservation plans (CCP)?

Comprehensive conservation plans (CCPs) guide overall refuge 

management. They ensure that management actions and refuge uses comply 

with the purposes for which a refuge was established and with other legal 

mandates such as the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System. They 

define long-term goals and objectives toward which refuge management 

activities are directed. 

Why do we update CCPs? The Alaska National Interest Lands 

Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980 as amended directs us, the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, to prepare, and from time to time, to revise a 

comprehensive conservation plan for each refuge in Alaska. This document is 

a summary of the 2008 revision of this plan. This CCP will provide direction 

for management of Kanuti Refuge for the next 15 years. 

Revising the CCP allowed us to: 

•	 update management guidelines according to national and regional 

policies and Federal laws concerning refuge management;

•	 incorporate new scientific information on refuge resources;

•	 reevaluate current refuge management guidelines based on 

changing public demands for the use of the refuge and its 

resources;

•	 ensure that all interested parties have an opportunity to 

participate in the development of management guidelines;

•	 establish broad management guidelines for refuge programs and 

activities;

•	 provide continuity in refuge management;

•	 provide a basis for budget requests; and

•	 provide a basis for evaluating accomplishments. 

Wild North Photography/USFWS 

4
5

Refuge Description

Location

Kanuti Refuge covers 1.6 million acres and lies on the 

Arctic Circle nearly 150 miles northwest of Fairbanks 

between the Brooks Range and the Ray Mountains. It is 

part of a broad basin formed by the Koyukuk and Kanuti 

rivers. The refuge extends from 65 degrees 59 minutes to 

66 degrees 53 minutes north latitude, and from 150 degrees 

58 minutes to 152 degrees 58 minutes west longitude. 

The lands and waters within the refuge are linked to the 

Bering Sea through the Koyukuk River, which drains into 

the Yukon River and then into the Bering Sea. The Dalton 

Highway and Alyeska Pipeline lie within eight miles of the 

eastern boundary. Elevations range from 500 feet to over 

3,000 feet. 

Establishment

In 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 

(ANCSA) was passed to settle Alaska Native land claims. 

Section 17 (d)(2) of ANCSA required that the Secretaries 

of Interior and Agriculture propose to Congress the 

designation of national parks, refuges, forests, wilderness, 

and wild and scenic river systems in Alaska. Official agency 

proposals and final environmental impact statements (EIS) 

were completed in 1974. 

Following controversy and congressional debates, 

President Jimmy Carter signed into law the Alaska 

National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) on 

December 2, 1980. Section 302 of this act established 

Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge as part of the National 

Wildlife Refuge System. 

Kanuti Refuge is in close proximity to the Dalton 

Highway Corridor which includes the Alyeska Pipeline. 

During some winters, depending on snow and ice 

conditions, supplies can be transported to Bettles on a 

winter road.
6

Lichen on birch tree

Great Gray Owls breed on the refuge.

Planning Procedures

Requirements

We are required by ANILCA to identify and describe:

•	 populations and habitats of the fish and wildlife resources of the 

refuge;

•	 special values of the refuge;

•	 areas within the refuge suitable for use as administrative sites or 

visitor facilities;

•	 present and potential requirements for access; and

•	 significant problems which may adversely affect the populations and 

habitats of fish and wildlife.

ANILCA further requires that in each CCP we:

•	 designate areas within the refuge according to their resources and 

values;

•	 specify the programs for conserving fish and wildlife within each 

such area;

•	 specify the uses within each such area that are compatible with the 

purposes of the refuge; and

•	 present opportunities which will be provided within the refuge 

for fish and wildlife-oriented recreation, ecological research, 

environmental education, and interpretation of refuge resources and 

values. 

Wild North Photography/USFWS Chris Harwood/USFWS

Bill Raften/USFWS

The Kanuti River, called Kk’oonootne in Koyukon Athabascan, exhibits 

stunning fall colors.
Kanuti River

7

The Planning Process

CCPs follow a process guided by 

planning requirements identified 

in ANILCA, the National Wildlife 

Refuge Improvement Act, the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service policies. In this process we:

Publish draft plan and environmental 

assessment

Ask public to review 

Ask public for their ideas

Identify planning issues

Develop goals, objectives, and 

alternatives to address the issues

Analyze impacts of and compare 

alternatives

We

are

here

Make decision and publish

final plan

Preplan and design the 

planning process

Analyze and address

public comments

Implement the plan and 

monitor and evaluate it

Review and revise the plan 

Done: 2004

Done: 2004

Done: 2005

Done: 2006

Done: 2007

Done: 2007/08

Done: 2008

Starting: 2008

Starting: 2023

or earlier if 

necessary

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
Biological Resources

The refuge contains prime examples of Alaska’s boreal forest ecosystem 

where black and white spruce, birch, and poplars are interspersed with 

lakes, wetlands, and open areas. The landscape is primarily shaped by fire, 

ice, and flooding. The refuge is home to a variety of wildlife, fish and plants 

that interact much as they did thousands of years ago. It provides natural 

lands and waters for breeding birds including ducks, geese, swans, loons, 

and other migrants. It provides habitat for moose, caribou, wolves, bears, 

beaver, muskrat, and other mammals. Rivers and seasonally flooded streams 

are home to several fish species among which are salmon, arctic grayling, 

and whitefish. 

Human Uses

There are no permanent roads or residences within the refuge. Access for 

visitors is limited by pathless terrain and rivers that are challenging to 

travel. We estimate that fewer than 20 non-local visitors use the refuge 

each year. They primarily access the refuge by airplanes equipped with 

floats or skis. The primary users of Kanuti Refuge are local residents of 

the four communities closest to the refuge: Allakaket, Alatna, Bettles, and 

Evansville. Access from the road system to these communities is mainly by 

commercial aircraft. Boats and snowmobiles are frequently used for local 

travel. About 250 people, the majority of whom are Koyukon Athabascan 

and Kobuk Nunamiut, live in these communities. Local residents live 

a partial subsistence lifestyle, relying on natural resources like moose, 

caribou, salmon, whitefish, ducks, and geese. 

8

An Allakaket resident harvests chum 

salmon on the Koyukuk River. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Wild North Photography/USFWS

Wild North Photography/USFWS

Refuge Assets

Beaver or noye’e in Koyukon 

Athabascan are abundant on Kanuti 

Refuge. They play a vital role in 

shaping the environment. 

The climate is continental and temperatures can range from over 90 degrees 

Fahrenheit in summer to minus 70 degrees Fahrenheit in winter. 
9

Special Values

According to ANILCA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is required 

to identify and describe “special values” of the refuge. Refuge staff has 

determined the following features of the refuge to be of special value: 

•	 Kanuti Canyon, a scenic stretch of the Kanuti River cutting through 

cliffs up to 400 feet high;

•	 the remote and essentially pristine character of the refuge, providing 

outstanding opportunities for people seeking solitude in their 

wilderness experience;

•	 the Hulgothen Bluffs, potentially containing numerous Pleistocene 

fossils;

•	 the subsistence way of life which is still actively practiced by many 

local residents, providing people with a livelihood which affects 

kinship, group cohesion as well as personal identity; 

•	 cultural resources such as pre-Athabascan and Athabascan sites and 

remnants of turn-of-the-century mining activities; and

•	 Sithylemenkat Lake, with its sand beaches and rocky outcrops, one of 

the most scenic areas within the external refuge boundaries. 

The Kanuti Canyon, or Kk’oonootne Tlaalooł Yeet, which means “in the throat 

of rocks or canyon” in Koyukon Athbascan, can be difficult to pass during 

low water or during extreme high water. South-facing sides of the canyon are 

warm and dry in summer and contain plant and bird communities not found 

elsewhere on the refuge. 

The refuge receives very little 

visitation due to its remoteness and 

inaccessibility, which provides unique 

opportunities for those seeking a remote 

wilderness experience and solitude.

Waterfowl are a highly valued 

subsistence resource, particularly in 

the spring when fresh fowl provide a 

welcome change in diet.

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Luke Smithwick/USFWS
10

The new part of Allakaket was built on 

higher ground after severe flooding in 

August 1994 washed away part of the 

city. 

Buildings of the old City of Allakaket 

along the shore of the Koyukuk River 

(Kk’uyetl’ots’ene) are prone to flooding 

during break-up in the spring.

Allakaket (Alaakkaakk’et, which means 

“the mouth of the Alatna River”) is 

located along the Koyukuk River at 

its confluence with the Alatna River. 

The old part of Allakaket lies on the 

shore of the river. Allakaket is mainly a 

Koyukon Athabascan village. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
11

The village of Evansville (left) and the 

City of Bettles (right) are two adjoining 

communities along the Koyukuk River 

between the Wild and John rivers. 

They are located three miles north of 

the refuge boundary (which intersects 

VOR Lake, the float plane base for the 

refuge in Bettles and pictured in the 

background).

The village of Alatna is named 

after the river of the same name 

and includes mainly descendents of 

Kobuk River Nunamiut Eskimos. 

Allakaket can be seen on the east 

bank of the Koyukuk River, opposite 

its confluence with the Alatna River. 

Both communities lie just a couple of 

miles west of the external boundary 

of the refuge. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Kanuti wetlands. Photo by Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

The nearest road-based community is 

Coldfoot on the Dalton Highway, 

40 miles northeast of the refuge. 

Kanuti staff represent the Service 

and the Kanuti, Arctic, and Yukon 

Flats National Wildlife Refuges at 

the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center 

in Coldfoot. An average of 8000 

visitors stop by annually.

Howard C. Anderson/http://www.astroshow.com
12

Refuge Vision

Wild North Photography/USFWS

Issues

What are Issues?

In the context of the CCP we define an issue as any unsettled matter, 

such as an initiative, opportunity, resource management problem, threat 

to refuge resources, conflict in uses, public concern, or presence of an 

undesirable resource condition that requires a management decision. 

To identify issues of importance to the public, we collected comments 

at meetings, in response to planning updates, and through visits with 

community elders and leaders. Issues were also identified based upon 

concerns by Fish and Wildlife Service staff. 

We initially identified a broad range of topics that became more focused as 

more information was gathered. Issues identified during the first round of 

public involvement were refined and clarified during later rounds. 

Several issues were raised that were outside the scope of this revision 

process, and thus are not treated in the plan. Issues outside the scope of 

the plan include those a) already addressed by existing laws and policies, 

b) outside the scope of refuge management, and c) addressed similarly 

regardless of the management alternative selected. 

Animal tracks along Sithylemenkat 

Lake

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
13

Kanuti Refuge Issues

We encountered two significant issues that were considered in the plan. 

These were incorporated into the management alternatives we developed 

and presented in the draft plan. 

Issue 1: Conservation of the Natural, Unaltered Character of the Refuge. 

Many people expressed desire that the refuge remain in a natural, wild state. 

They wanted minimal intrusion on natural systems and for the refuge to 

remain wild for the future. Wild character can mean a place of solitude where 

a visitor might not expect to encounter another human during the course of 

a visit. It can also mean the absence of roads, trails and towns or villages. 

The Kanuti Refuge is one of the few refuges in Alaska that is both roadless 

and without communities inside its boundaries. These characteristics 

help to maintain the wild character of Kanuti Refuge. Following are some 

representative comments:

“It is best to keep it wild.”

“We want the country to stay the same for the next generations.”

“We make our livings off the rivers.”

“Your 15-year focus should be on preservation and conservation in a balance 

that will keep this place remote and isolated for the years to come.”

“I would like to see you keep Kanuti wild with minimum facilities. Have 

something for visitors in Bettles but not on the refuge. Wildlife should come 

first. Isn’t that why the refuge was established?”

“Take a long look and include the refuge in the wilderness system.”

“I would like to see you have the opportunity to give Kanuti wilderness 

protection and status. These bio-reserves where ecological processes are 

still allowed to shape the environment have important implications for the 

world...Protecting the habitat should have the highest priority for planning 

for the refuge; it is more important than hunting, although there should 

always be a balance between consumptive and non-consumptive use...limit 

recreational activities when necessary; protection of the land and wildlife 

should be the number one priority.”

Issue 2: Acceptance and Integration of New Management Policies and Guidelines 

into the Plan. 

This issue came from within the Fish and Wildlife Service. The new 

management policies and guidelines were developed as part of the Alaskawide refuge comprehensive planning effort. These policies and guidelines will 

ensure that refuge management actions are consistent throughout Alaska. 

USFWS

Wild North Photography/USFWS

The stretch of the Kanuti Kilolitna 

River (Kk’oonootne Kk’eeyh 

Degheleetne) where it enters the 

refuge, epitomizes the fundamental 

qualities of wilderness. 

Winter scenery on Kanuti Lake (Kk’oonoo Benkk’e)
14

How does the Refuge address the Issues? 

ANILCA requires us to designate areas within a refuge according to their 

resources and values and to specify programs and uses within those areas. 

To meet this requirement, Minimal, Moderate, and Intensive Management 

categories were established as part of the Alaska-wide planning effort. 

For each management category, appropriate activities, public uses, commercial uses, and facilities were identified. Only the Minimal and Moderate 

Management categories apply to Kanuti Refuge. Minimal Management 

maintains the natural environment with very little evidence of humancaused change. Moderate Management allows actions and uses that may 

result in temporary or permanent changes to the natural environment but 

are small in scale and do not disrupt natural processes. 

Issue 1: Conservation of the Natural, Unaltered Character of the Refuge. 

A majority of the refuge (86 percent) will be designated as Minimal Management to preserve the refuge’s wild character. Portions of the refuge 

(14 percent) in the north and west will remain or become designated as 

Moderate Management. 

Issue 2: Acceptance and Integration of New Management Policies and 

Guidelines into the Plan. 

The new Management, Policies, and Guidelines for National Wildlife 

Refuges in Alaska are governed by Federal laws (i.e., the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 and ANILCA), by regulations 

implementing these laws, by treaties, by Service policy, and by principles 

of resource management. All these establish standards for resource 

management or limit the range of potential activities that may be allowed 

or authorized in the different management categories on refuges. 

The regional management policies and guidelines described in Appendix J 

in the full document were developed as common management direction 

for national wildlife refuges in the Alaska Region of the Fish and Wildlife 

Service. These policies and guidelines are essentially the same for all of 

the refuges in this region. 

The Kanuti Flats (left) provide a wide 

variety of wetland habitats for nesting 

waterbirds. The intervening uplands 

offer diverse vegetation ranging from 

dwarf shrub to coniferous and deciduous 

forest and are inhabited by numerous 

songbird species. 

The Blackpoll Warbler is on the list of 

“Species of Special Concern” for the 

State of Alaska.

Green-winged Teal (k’etsutl) are one of 

the most common ducks on the Refuge.

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS USFWS
15

Alternatives

Federal law required that we develop a range of reasonable alternatives. Alternatives represent different management options for future actions. They are different ways to respond to issues, management concerns, and opportunities. Each of the three Alternatives we presented in the draft plan was developed with the Refuge System mission 

and the refuge’s purposes in mind.

Our first Alternative A (“no action”) was legally required and presented no difference from the Management Alternative in the 1987 plan. It designated 67 percent of the refuge within Minimal Management and 33 percent within 

Moderate Management. The second Alternative (B) put all federal lands within the refuge boundary in Minimal 

Management. Our third and preferred Alternative (C) designated 85 percent of the refuge as Minimal Management 

and the remainder of the refuge along and north of the Koyukuk River as Moderate Management. 

The Alternatives we presented in the draft plan generated a number of public comments. Generally, local residents 

and community leaders preferred that refuge lands adjoining private lands near their communities be in the Moderate Management category. Conversely, non-locals preferred to see more of the refuge in the Minimal Management 

category. 

Refuge manager Mike Spindler presenting the draft CCP to the Fairbanks 

Chamber of Commerce in July 2007. 

Christopher Harwood/USFWS

Discussion of the draft CCP with Kanuti Refuge staff and members of the 

communities of Allakaket and Alatna in April 2007. 

Deborah Webb/USFWS

Of the commenters who preferred a 

particular Alternative a majority indicated that they preferred Alternative 

B because the entire refuge would be in 

Minimal Management. Slightly fewer 

commenters preferred Alternative C. 

People commented that they liked the 

flexibility of what may be allowed in 

Moderate Management, and one noted 

that although he/she preferred Minimal 

Management, the mixture of federal and 

private land warranted Moderate Management. A few additional comments 

suggesting changes to Alternative C 

were mixed, with some people wanting 

more Minimal Management and others 

wanting more Moderate. 

As a result of these comments we 

modified, and have adopted, a version 

of Alternative C (see maps on next 

two pages).

We believe that this alternative 

strikes a balance in maintaining the 

wild character over the majority of 

the refuge while allowing for more 

intensive human uses in areas near 

the communities. 
16
17

Below: The preferred Alternative C as 

presented in the 2007 draft plan. 
18

Wild North P{hotography/USFWS

Trumpeter Swan taking off from a 

frozen lake.

Adam Kokx/USFWS

Sundew (Drosera rotundifolia) 

is a carnivorous plant. It attracts 

insects with its red glandular hairs 

which are covered in a sugary sticky 

substance. It is often found in bogs 

and marshes.

Kanuti Refuge Management

Management of Kanuti Refuge will generally continue to follow the same 

course of action that it has previously. The new vision statement and goals 

(see page 31), developed specifically with low impact management as 

philosophy, will be incorporated. The regional management direction (see 

page 23 and Appendix J in the full document) will be incorporated. 

Refuge management will strive to maintain the ecological integrity of 

the refuge with little evidence of human-caused change. Disturbances 

to resources from public uses, economic activities, and facilities will be 

minimized. Habitats will generally be allowed to change and function 

through natural processes. Because activities that could have been 

allowed under Moderate Management in the previous plan of 1987 were 

never implemented, the public will see little or no change from the existing 

situation despite changes in land classification. 

Pages 19-22 present a summary of Kanuti Refuge management followed 

by a management categories table which introduces specifics of the 

regional management direction relevant to Kanuti Refuge. 

Habitat management within the refuge largely includes inventory and 

monitoring of vegetation biodiversity. 

USFWS
19

Firewood is an important resource 

for people in the communities 

surrounding the refuge.

Wild North Photography/USFWS

Fish, Wildlife, and Habitat Management

Management will focus on understanding and monitoring natural systems 

rather than manipulating system components. Active management will 

emphasize protecting systems, such as removing non-native plant species 

mainly using manual treatments. Chemicals may be used in accordance with 

policy and regulations if there are no other feasible techniques available. 

Fire Management

The primary objectives of fire management on Service lands are to conserve, 

protect, or enhance habitats and to maintain ecosystems for the benefit of fish 

and wildlife. Additionally, fire management activities must meet the goals 

of protecting human health and safety and protection of structures. Fire 

management activities on the refuge include research, preparedness, wildland 

fire suppression, wildland fire use (where natural ignitions are allowed to 

burn for resource benefits), prescribed fire, outreach, eduction, monitoring, 

and prevention and enforcement of fire trespass. Fire management options 

range from “Limited Suppression” where fires are allowed to burn to benefit 

wildlife habitat, to “Modified Suppression,” to “Full Suppression” where 

most fires are suppressed. All of these management options could be applied 

in either of the Minimal or Moderate Management categories. ANILCA 

requires that we manage the refuge for its natural diversity, including wildlife 

and habitat. In the next 10-15 years we will manage fire both as a natural 

process that is essential in maintaining the natural variety of vegetational 

development stages typical of Kanuti and interior Alaska, and also to 

maintain a higher proportion of habitats at the older end of the post-burn 

vegetation succession spectrum. The latter will allow vegetation within a 

specially designated area (290,000 acres in the center of the refuge southeast 

of Allakaket) to recover from earlier fires and will favor wildlife species that 

inhabit areas that have not burned for more than 80-100 years. Such areas are 

limited on the refuge. The Kanuti Refuge Fire Management Plan provides 

specific information regarding the use and management of fire on the refuge. 

Subsistence Management

ANILCA stipulates that rural Alaska residents who are engaged in 

subsistence lifestyles will have priority uses of refuge resources for 

traditional purposes. The opportunity for continued subsistence use is one of 

the refuge’s purposes and will continue to be a management priority. Rural 

Alaska residents will be afforded the opportunity to hunt, fish, and trap in 

accordance with State and Federal regulations. Plant material and dead 

standing or downed timber can be gathered without a special use permit. 

However, gathering live standing timber greater than six inches diameter 

at breast height (4 1⁄2 feet above ground level) for house logs, firewood, or 

other uses will require a special use permit. Snowmobiles will be allowed 

for traditional activities when adequate snow cover is present. Many 

aspects of subsistence management and harvest regulations are not within 

the jurisdiction of the refuge and are thus not within the scope of this plan. 

However, the refuge will continue to work with the State and other Federal 

agencies and stakeholders in harvest and resource monitoring programs to 

ensure the health and viability of wildlife populations. 

Habitat alteration resulting 

from fire: These two photos, 

taken from the same point on 

the Minnkokut Alaska Landbird 

Monitoring Survey plot in June 

2003 (top) and June 2005, illustrate 

habitat alteration from the 2004 

Clawanmenka fire. 

Christopher Harwood/USFWS R. Craig/USFWS
20

Predator Management

Rising public concerns about the status of moose and caribou populations 

prompted requests and proposals for predator control to the State, to the 

Federal Subsistence Board (FSB), and to individual refuges. The Service 

acknowledges that wolves and bears can significantly affect ungulate 

prey population levels and that hunter success can be lowered in areas 

with reduced prey populations. We consider predator control a legitimate 

management tool provided that it is scientifically justified, used in a 

prudent and ecologically sound manner, and is consistent with the laws 

and policies governing refuge management. If these conditions occurred, 

predator control could be considered by the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Public involvement in this process would take place through a separate 

planning process and environmental assessment. 

Biological Integrity Policy

Whereas most refuges in the United States are concerned with 

restoring biological diversity and integrity, refuges in Alaska generally 

support intact ecosystems. While the refuge’s establishing purposes 

and the System mission serve as the basis for the goals and objectives, 

maintenance and restoration of biological integrity, diversity, and 

environmental health of the refuge are to be included in the refuge’s goals 

and objectives. Biological integrity is defined as the “biotic composition, 

structure, and functioning at genetic, organism, and community levels 

comparable with historic conditions, including the natural biological 

processes that shape genomes, organisms, and communities.” Kanuti 

Refuge’s first purpose is to conserve fish and wildlife populations and 

habitats in their natural diversity. Because the biological diversity on this 

refuge is believed to be intact and functioning in a healthy manner, within 

the natural range of variability, actions that support the refuge’s first 

purpose also uphold the biological integrity policy.

Subsistence hunters usually hunt moose along the rivers in September. The 

average number of days it takes a subsistence hunter to harvest a moose has 

increased in recent years, perhaps due to lower moose density or effects of 

climate change (see page 22).

Bill Raften/USFWS

Henshaw Creek (Saagedleno’, which 

means “creek of Saagedle” [big 

mountain]), is an important salmon 

spawning stream that drains into the 

Koyukuk River (Kk’uyetl’ots’ene)

approximately 23 miles above Allakaket 

and Alatna.

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Adam Kokx/USFWS

Moose (deneege) are an important 

subsistence resource. They are also 

sought by recreational hunters visiting 

the refuge. The estimated moose density 

on the refuge has ranged between 0.22-

0.76 moose per square mile between 

1989 and 2007. The lowest estimated 

population occurred most recently in 

2007. 
21

Public Use

There are no roads or permanent residences within the refuge. The terrain 

is pathless; rivers are challenging to travel. Restrictions on off-road vehicle 

travel within the Dalton Highway corridor just east of the Refuge limit access 

for visitors. We estimate that fewer than 20 non-local visitors use the refuge 

each year. However, the refuge does provide year-round opportunities for 

visitors who seek wildlife-dependent recreation in a remote environment. The 

refuge will continue to allow, and where possible, facilitate the priority public 

uses of hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing and photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation (as identified in the Refuge Improvement Act) 

as long as they remain compatible with refuge purposes. State regulations 

will govern the harvest of fish and game unless those activities are further 

regulated by the Federal Subsistence Board. 

Access

Access to the refuge from outside the local area is most frequently by 

chartered airplane. Fixed wing airplanes can land in many areas of the 

refuge, on water in summer or on ice or snow in winter. Airplane landings 

will be allowed throughout the refuge and will not be limited. The use of offroad vehicles (ORVs) other than on established roads and parking areas is 

prohibited except on designated routes or areas or with a valid permit under 

the Code of Federal Regulations. Currently there are no roads, no parking 

areas, and no designated routes or areas on the refuge. Designated routes 

and areas could only be allowed in Moderate and Intensive Management 

areas. The definition of ORV in the Code of Federal Regulations excludes 

snomobiles; it includes airboats, air cushion vehicles, and other motorized 

vehicles. ANILCA allows appropriate use of snowmobiles (during adequate 

snow cover), motorboats and other means of surface transportation methods 

for traditional activities, and for travel to and from villages and homesites, 

subject to reasonable regulation. At this time, there is no documented 

history of subsistence use of ORVs on the refuge. Should new information 

become available that establishes ORVs as a traditional mode of access for 

subsistence purposes on the refuge, we will manage the use in accordance 

with the Code of Federal Regulations, including establishing refuge-specific 

regulations if closures or restrictions are needed to protect refuge resources.

Refuge Infrastructure and Administration

Refuge headquarters is located in the Federal Building in Fairbanks. The 

refuge operates an airplane based at the Service hangar at the Fairbanks 

International Airport and maintains a storage shed, fuel storage, and airplane 

slip at the airport float pond. The refuge operates a sub-headquarters in 

Bettles, where a residence, bunkhouse, hangar, workshop, boatyard, fuel 

storage shed, floatplane dock and storage shed are maintained. The refuge 

shares office and visitor contact space with the National Park Service at a 

newly constructed building in Bettles. The Johnson B. Moses administrative 

cabin, located within the refuge at Kanuti Lake, supports field work 

activities. Another cabin, used as housing for summer employees working at 

the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center is located along the Dalton Highway 

approximately five miles north of Coldfoot. The Service has no plans for 

infrastructure projects on refuge lands. 

Wildlife Observation: The Kanuti 

Refuge, particularly on or along 

waterways like the Kanuti River, 

offers challenging, yet rewarding 

opportunities for wildlife observation 

and photography. 

Christopher Harwood/USFWS Wild North Photography/USFWS

Snowmobiles are allowed on the 

refuge on waterways and over land 

where snow cover is sufficient. 
22

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Johnson B. Moses Administrative Cabin at Kanuti Lake (Kk’oonoo Benkk’e)

Climate Change

The climate in Alaska has warmed by about 4 degrees Fahrenheit since the mid-1950s, including a 7-degree 

Fahrenheit increase during winter in interior Alaska. Climate models project that the greatest warming will 

continue to occur in the arctic region. Data indicate that arctic summers are now warmer than at any other time 

in the last 400 years and that the snowfree period is lengthening. A warming climate will have numerous effects 

on habitat, hydrology, and species occurrence that could fundamentally change the boreal forest as we know it. 

These effects could include melting permafrost, changes in rain and snow patterns, drying wetlands, increased 

occurrence of wildland fire, shifts in the distribution and composition of plant communities, lengthening of plant 

growing seasons, changes in the ranges and breeding behavior of wildlife species, increased likelihood for invasive 

plant establishment, and increased possibility of wildlife disease and insect outbreaks. These changes in habitat and 

wildlife due to climate warming will, in turn, affect the arctic and subarctic people who rely on natural resources for 

food, fur, and cultural identity. 

Changes in wetlands are of particular concern due to their abundance within the refuge, their contribution to the 

refuge’s biodiversity, and their importance to numerous fish and wildlife species. Scientists found that a decrease 

in the surface area of closed-basin ponds in interior Alaska ranged between four and 31 percent between 1950 and 

2002. These changes occurred even though there was no significant trend in the amount of total annual rain and 

snow recorded at nearby weather stations. The authors believed that the following factors contributed to the 

observed changes in wetlands: increased loss of water due to both evaporation and transpiration by plants caused 

by warmer, longer growing seasons; melting permafrost that allows lakes to drain; and increased incidence of 

wildland fire that accelerates warming of permafrost. 

Research and monitoring efforts can help determine the extent of climate related changes on the refuge. 

Since changes occur on a much broader scale than the refuge, the most appropriate role for the refuge in 

these investigations is likely to participate in larger, landscape-level efforts to monitor climate change and its 

effects on wildlife and habitats. Though there may be little that refuge staff can do to mitigate these changes, 

awareness of their long-term effect may result in reprioritization of issues and changes in management strategies. 

Communication with resource users regarding evolving information about environmental changes and discussion 

of potential management approaches will be increasingly important as conditions change. For example, in areas 

of Moderate Management we would be allowed to erect water control structures to enhance waterfowl habitat or 

mitigate potential wetland loss due to climate change. 
23

Management Categories Table

This table gives an overview, by management category, of activities, public 

uses, commercial uses, and facilities according to the new management 

direction. It has been adapted to show only activities and categories 

that apply to Kanuti Refuge. For the complete table refer to the full-size 

document. 

The following are definitions of terms used in the table: 

Allowed—The activity, use or facility is allowed under existing laws and 

regulations. 

May be allowed—Activity, use or facility may be allowed subject to sitespecific National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) analysis, an 

appropriate use finding (when required), a specific refuge compatibility 

determination (when required), and compliance with all applicable laws 

and regulations of the Service, other Federal agencies and the State of 

Alaska. 

May be authorized—Activity, use or facility may be allowed; a special use 

permit or other authorization is required.

Not allowed—Activity, use or facility is not allowed.

NEPA analysis—All activities, uses and facilities proposed for a refuge 

that have the potential to result in significant effects on the environment 

require an analysis of potential environmental impacts under the 

National Environmental Policy Act. This analysis may be documented as 

a categorical exclusion (CE), an environmental assessment (EA), or an 

environmental impact statement (EIS), depending on the nature of the 

proposed project. 

Appropriate Use—All uses over which the Service has jurisdiction must 

be determined to be appropriate following direction in the Service Manual. 

Hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography and environmental 

education and interpretation are considered appropriate by national policy 

with no further analysis required. 

Compatibility—All activities, uses and facilities allowed on the refuge, 

except management actions undertaken by or for the Service, must 

be compatible with the purposes of the refuge and the mission of the 

Refuge System. The analysis that occurs results in a refuge compatibility 

determination. 

Temporary—A continuous period of time not to exceed 12 months, except 

as specifically provided otherwise. 

Area or time restrictions—All activities and uses allowed on a refuge may 

be restricted in certain areas or at certain times, at the discretion of the 

refuge manager and with the appropriate level of public involvement, by 

emergency (short-term) or permanent regulation, if necessary to protect 

refuge resources or human health and safety.

Management emergencies—Activities, uses and facilities not allowed on a 

refuge or in specific management categories may be allowed if naturallyoccurring or human-caused actions adversely affect refuge resources or 

threaten human health and safety. Blueberries (geege), lowbush 

cranberries (dinaałakk’aza) and 

rosehips (hus) are part of the diet 

for people who use the refuge for 

subsistence. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS USFWS Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
24

ACTIVITY MINIMAL 

MANAGEMENT 

MODERATE 

MANAGEMENT 

ECOSYSTEM, HABITAT, AND FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

Ecosystem and Landscape Management

Collecting Information on and Monitoring Ecosystem 

Components

Data gathering, monitoring and maintaining a comprehensive 

database of selected ecosystem components (plants, animals, 

fish, water, air). 

Allowed Allowed

Research and Management

Access and collection of data necessary for management 

decisions or to further science by the Service. 

Allowed Allowed

Access and collection of data necessary for management 

decisions or to further science by ADF&G. Allowed Allowed 

Access and collection of data necessary for management 

decisions or to further science by other researchers. May be authorized May be authorized

Research and Management Facilities

May be permanent or temporary structures or camps including 

weirs, counting towers and sonar counters. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management

Describing, Locating, and Mapping Habitats

Development of quantitative, written, and graphic descriptions 

of fish and wildlife habitat including water, food, and shelter 

components. 

Allowed Allowed

Habitat Management 

Mechanical Treatment Activities such as cutting, crushing 

or mowing of vegetation; water control structures; fencing; 

artificial nest structures.

Not allowed; with 

exceptions (see full 

document)

May be allowed

Chemical Treatment Use of chemicals to remove or control 

nonnative species.

May be allowed May be allowed

Manual Treatment Use of hand tools to remove, reduce, 

or modify hazardous plant fuels, exotic plant species, or to 

modify habitats (e.g., remove beaver dams).

May be allowed May be allowed

Aquatic Habitat Modifications

Activities such as stream bank restoration, passage structures, 

fish barriers, or removal of obstacles which result in physical 

modification of aquatic habitats to maintain or restore native 

fish species.

May be allowed May be allowed

Fire Management—Prescribed Fires

Fire ignited by management actions to meet specific 

management objectives. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Fire Management—Wildland Fire Use

The planned use of naturally occurring fires to meet 

management objectives. 

May be allowed May be allowed
25

ACTIVITY MINIMAL 

MANAGEMENT 

MODERATE 

MANAGEMENT 

Fire Management—Fire Suppression

Management actions intended to protect identified resources from a fire, 

extinguish a fire, or alter a fire’s direction of spread. 

Allowed Allowed

Nonnative and Pest Plant Control

Monitoring, extirpation, control, removal and/or relocation and other 

management practices for pest and nonnative plant species. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Water Quality and Quantity Management

Monitoring of water quality and quantity to identify baseline data and 

for management purposes; includes installation of gauging stations. 

Allowed Allowed

Fish and Wildlife Population Management

Reintroduction of Species

The reintroduction of native species to restore natural diversity of fish, 

wildlife and habitats. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Fish and Wildlife Control

The control, relocation, sterilization, removal or other management of 

native species including predators to maintain natural diversity of fish, 

wildlife and habitats; favor other fish or wildlife populations; protect 

reintroduced, threatened, or endangered species; or to restore depleted 

native populations. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Nonnative Species Management

The removal or control of nonnative species (including predators). May be allowed May be allowed

Pest Management and Disease Prevention and Control

Relocation or removal of organisms that threaten human health or 

survival of native fish, wildlife or plant species. Management practices 

directed at controlling pathogens that threaten fish, wildlife and people, 

such as rabies and parasite control. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Fishery Restoration

Actions taken to restore fish access to spawning and rearing habitat, or 

actions taken to restore populations to historic levels. Includes harvest 

management, escapement goals, habitat restoration, stocking, egg 

incubation boxes, and lake fertilization. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Fishery Restoration Facilities

Fisheries facilities may be permanent or temporary and may include 

hatcheries, fish ladders, fish passages, fish barriers and associated 

structures. 

May be authorized May be authorized

Fishery Enhancement

Activities applied to a fish stock to supplement numbers of harvestable 

fish to a level beyond what could be naturally produced based upon a 

determination or reasonable estimate of historic levels. 

May be allowed May be allowed
26

ACTIVITY MINIMAL 

MANAGEMENT 

MODERATE 

MANAGEMENT 

Fishery Enhancement Facilities

May be permanent or temporary and may include hatcheries, 

egg incubation boxes, fish ladders, fish passages, fish barriers 

and associated structures.

May be authorized May be authorized

Native Fish Introductions

Movement of native fish species within a drainage on the refuge 

to areas where they have not historically existed. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Nonnative Species Introductions

Introduction of species not naturally occurring within the refuge. Not allowed Not allowed

SUBSISTENCE

Subsistence Activities

Fishing, Hunting, Trapping, and Berry Picking

The taking of fish and wildlife and other natural resources for 

personal consumption, as provided by law.

Allowed Allowed

Collection of House Logs and Firewood 

Harvesting live standing timber greater than 6 inches diameter 

at breast height for personal or extended family use. 

May be authorized May be authorized

Collection of House Logs and Firewood

Live trees between 3 and 6 inches diameter at breast height for 

personal or extended family use.

20 trees or less per year 

allowed; more than 20 trees 

per year may be authorized

20 trees or less per year 

allowed; more than 20 

trees per year may be 

authorized

Collection of Plant Materials

Harvesting trees less than 3 inches diameter at breast height, 

dead standing or downed timber, grass, bark, and other plant 

materials used for subsistence purposes. 

Allowed Allowed

Temporary Facilities

Establishment and use of tent platforms, shelters, and other 

temporary facilities and equipment directly related to the taking 

of fish and wildlife. 

Allowed Allowed

Subsistence Cabins – See Cabins 

Subsistence Access - subject to regulations under provisions of Section 180 of ANILCA

Use of snowmobiles, motorboats, and other means of surface 

transportation traditionally employed for subsistence purposes. Allowed Allowed

ACCESS

Restrictions subject to provisions of Section 1110 of ANILCA as applicable; see also Subsistence Access section above

Foot Allowed Allowed

Dogs and Dog Teams Allowed Allowed

Other Domestic Animals Allowed Allowed
27

ACTIVITY MINIMAL 

MANAGEMENT 

MODERATE 

MANAGEMENT 

Nonmotorized Boats

Includes canoes, kayaks, rafts, etc.

Allowed Allowed

Motorized

Use of snowmachine, motorboats, airplanes and nonmotorized 

surface transportation methods for traditional activities and for 

travel to and from villages and homesites. Allowed Allowed

Off-Road Vehicles (All-Terrain Vehicles)

Includes air boats and air cushion vehicles.

Not allowed; with exceptions 

(see full document) May be allowed

Helicopters

Includes all rotary-wing aircraft. May be authorized May be authorized

PUBLIC USE, RECREATION, and OUTREACH ACTIVITIES

Also see ACCESS and Commercial Recreation sections.

Hunting, Fishing, Wildlife Observation, Wildlife 

Photography, Interpretation and Environmental Education 

Note: All activities listed are priority public uses Allowed Allowed

Trapping, Walking, Hiking, Camping at Undeveloped Sites, 

and Dog Sledding Allowed Allowed

General Photography

See also COMMERCIAL USES. Allowed Allowed

Outreach Activities Allowed Allowed

Public Use and Recreation Facilities - level of development is consistent with management intent of the 

category

All Weather Roads 

And associated developments including bridges. Not allowed May be allowed

Unimproved Roads

Note: while unimproved roads are not allowed in Minimal 

management, roads may exist. In these management categories, 

roads would not be designated for use or maintained.

Not allowed May be allowed

Designated Off-Road Vehicle (All-Terrain Vehicle) Trails 

and Routes Not allowed May be allowed

Constructed and Maintained Airstrips Not allowed May be allowed

Cleared Landing Strips and Areas

Includes unimproved areas where airplanes land. Minor brush 

cutting or rock removal by hand is allowed for maintenance.

May be allowed May be allowed

Constructed Hiking Trails

Includes bridges, boardwalks, trailheads, and related facilities. May be allowed May be allowed
28

ACTIVITY MINIMAL 

MANAGEMENT 

MODERATE 

MANAGEMENT 

Designated Hiking Routes

Unimproved and unmaintained trails; may be designated by 

signs, cairns, and/or on maps.

Allowed Allowed

Boat Launches and Docks

Designated sites for launching and storing watercraft or tying up 

a float plane.

May be allowed May be allowed

Visitor Contact Facilities

A variety of staffed and unstaffed facilities providing 

information on the refuge and its resources to the public; 

facilities range from visitor centers to kiosks and signs. 

May be authorized May be authorized

Temporary Facilities

Includes tent frames, caches, and other similar or related 

facilities; does not include cabins. See also SUBSISTENCE, 

COMMERCIAL USES, and Administrative Facilities. 

May be authorized May be authorized

Cabins – also other related structures such as outdoor toilets, food caches, storage sheds, and fish drying racks 

Public Use Cabin

A cabin administered by the Service and available for use by the 

public; intended only for short-term public recreational use and 

occupancy. 

Existing cabins allowed to 

remain; new cabins may be 

allowed

Existing cabins allowed to 

remain; new cabins may be 

allowed

Administrative Cabin

Any cabin primarily used by refuge staff or other authorized 

personnel for the administration of the refuge. 

May be allowed May be allowed

Subsistence Cabin

Any cabin necessary for health and safety and to provide for 

the continuation of ongoing subsistence activities; not for 

recreational use.

Existing cabins allowed to 

remain; new cabins may be 

authorized

Existing cabins allowed to 

remain; new cabins may be 

authorized

Commercial Cabin

Any cabin which is used in association with a commercial 

operation including but not limited to commercial fishing 

activities and recreational guiding services.

Existing cabins allowed to 

remain; new cabins may be 

authorized

Existing cabins allowed to 

remain; new cabins may be 

authorized

Other Cabins 

Cabins associated with authorized uses by other government 

agencies.

May be authorized May be authorized

Administrative Facilities

Administrative Field Camps

Temporary facilities used by refuge staff and other authorized 

personnel to support individual (generally) field projects; may 

include, but not limited to, tent frames and temporary/portable 

outhouses, shower facilities, storage/maintenance facilities, and 

caches.

May be allowed May be allowed
29

ACTIVITY MINIMAL 

MANAGEMENT 

MODERATE 

MANAGEMENT 

Administrative Field Sites

Permanent facilities used by refuge staff or other authorized personnel 

for the administration of the refuge. Includes administrative cabins and 

related structures (see Cabins) and larger multi-facility administrative 

sites necessary to support on-going field projects, research, and other 

management activities. Temporary facilities, to meet short-term needs, 

may supplement the permanent facilities at these sites.

Use of existing sites 

allowed including 

replacement of existing 

facilities as necessary; 

new sites may be 

allowed

Use of existing sites 

allowed including 

replacement of existing 

facilities as necessary; 

new sites may be 

allowed

Hazardous Materials Storage

Sites including appropriate structures and equipment necessary for the 

storage and transfer of fuels and other hazardous materials used for 

administrative purposes; must be in compliance with all Federal and 

State requirements.

May be allowed May be allowed

Boat Launches and Docks

Designated sites for launching and storing watercraft or tying up a float 

plane.

May be allowed May be allowed

Radio Repeater Sites

Sites used to maintain radio communications equipment; may include 

helispots for access.

May be allowed May be allowed

COMMERCIAL USES

Except as noted, a special use permit or other authorization is required for economic use of a refuge.

Commercial Recreation – includes all forms of guiding, including those operated by nonprofit, educational, 

and other noncommercial groups 

Guiding and Outfittinga May be authorized May be authorized

Transportingb May be authorized May be authorized

Fixed-Wing Air Taxisc May be authorized May be authorized

Mineral Exploration - see full plan for information on the Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program

Surface Geological Studies

Includes surface rock collecting and geological mapping activities 

(includes helicopter or fixed-wing access).

May be authorized May be authorized

Mineral Development

Oil and Gas Leasing 

Leasing, drilling and extraction of oil and gas for commercial purposes. 

Includes all associated above and below ground facilities.

Not allowed Not allowed

Sale of Sand, Gravel, and Other Common Variety Minerals

Extraction of sand, gravel, and other saleable minerals for commercial 

purposes; includes commercial use by Federal, State, and local 

agencies.

Not allowed May be authorized

Other Mineral Leasing

Includes the extraction of coal, geothermal resources, potassium, 

sodium, phosphate, sulfur, or other leaseable minerals for commercial 

purposes. 

Not allowed Not allowed

a, b, c for definition refer to text section in full document
30

ACTIVITY MINIMAL 

MANAGEMENT 

MODERATE 

MANAGEMENT 

Other Commercial Activities

Commercial Filming, Videotaping, and Audiotapinga May be authorized May be authorized

Commercial Timber and Firewood Harvestb May be authorized May be authorized

Commercial Gathering of Other Refuge Resourcesc Not allowed May be authorized

Transportation and Utility Systems

Includes transmission lines, pipelines, telephone and electrical power 

lines, oil and gas pipelines, communication systems, roads, airstrips, 

and other necessary related facilities. Does not include facilities 

associated with on-refuge oil and gas development. 

May be authorized; 

would require a plan 

amendment

May be authorized

Navigation Aids and Other Facilities

Includes air and water navigation aids and related facilities, 

communication sites and related facilities, facilities for national 

defense purposes and related air/water navigation aids, and facilities for 

weather, climate, and fisheries research and monitoring; includes both 

private and government facilities. 

May be authorized May be authorized

Small Hydroelectric Power Development

Hydroelectric generation by low-head or instream structures that do not 

change the flow of the river. 

Not Allowed May be authorized

a, b, c for definition refer to text section in full document

The upper Kanuti River receives scant boat traffic, it is rare that a boat wake disturbs the calm waters and reflections. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS
31

Refuge Goals and Objectives

The refuge vision, purposes, and management alternative provided a framework for developing goals and objectives 

for managing the refuge. Many of the objectives important for managing subsistence activities and public use of the 

refuge require monitoring or improving our knowledge of the natural resources linked to these activities. Objectives 

addressing baseline knowledge of refuge natural resources are mainly listed under Goals 1 and 2. Most of the 

objectives for subsistence or public use are listed under Goal 3 or 4, which are focused on improving our knowledge 

of the public’s use of the refuge’s resources. The ordering of the goals and objectives below is not intended to imply 

prioritization. Some of these objectives may not be addressed during the life of the plan, depending on funding and 

personnel available. Each objective is based on an in-depth and explicit rationale. Full-length rationales can be found 

in Chapter 2 of the full document. 

Objectives:

1. Collaborate with staff of other refuges, agencies, and 

research institutes to gain a better understanding of 

boreal forest ecosystems. 

Rationale: Cooperating on projects is a cost-effective 

strategy to address research needs during times 

of shrinking budgets. Many ecological questions 

are best studied on a regional scale and cannot be 

adequately addressed by working within a single land 

management unit (e.g., effects of climate change).

2. By 2009, complete the Inventory and Monitoring 

step-down plan to integrate and direct inventory and 

monitoring of plants, fish and wildlife. 

Rationale: An Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) stepdown plan is required by Service policy. The I&M plan 

will document the rationale, techniques, and schedule 

for routinely conducted inventories and monitoring 

efforts and ensures that information is collected in a 

biologically and statistically sound manner.

3. Complete an inventory of breeding birds and their 

habitats, vascular plants, fire history, and terrestrial 

insects within the refuge within 20 years of adoption of 

the plan using an integrated plot-based approach. 

Rationale: The refuge is mandated by ANILCA to 

conserve its fish and wildlife populations and habitats 

in their natural diversity, yet data are lacking to 

adequately describe this diversity. A basic biological 

inventory also was recommended by a panel of 

experts during a 2002 review of the Refuge’s biological 

program.

4. Obtain a moose population estimate for the refuge 

at 1-3 year intervals, including age and sex ratios, 

by conducting aerial surveys in cooperation with 

neighboring State and Federal land managers. 

Rationale: Moose are important to the refuge in both 

ecological and human terms. They are an important 

subsistence species and most non-local visitors that 

currently come to the refuge do so to hunt moose. 

Goal 1: Conserve the refuge’s diversity of wildlife, fish, and habitats, while allowing natural processes, 

including wildland fire and the natural hydrologic cycle, to shape the environment.

Kanuti Refuge biologist and State of Alaska Fish and 

Game biologist are taking measurements from a moose 

before collaring it.

T. Cambier
32

Non-native white sweetclover 

(Melilotus alba) could pose a threat 

to Kanuti Refuge.

5. Obtain baseline information about late winter availability and use of 

moose forage species. 

Rationale: Moose are an important resource in the refuge, and we 

currently have relatively little information on the availability and use of 

forage species, primarily willows. Browse information will give us a better 

understanding about the potential for the habitat to support growth in the 

moose population. 

6. Implement the refuge’s Fire Management Plan within the first two 

years of its approval.

Rationale: Fire is one of the main drivers of the ecosystems within the 

Kanuti Refuge. The plan provides management strategies and objectives 

that enable the Service to conserve, protect, or enhance habitats as well as 

address human health and safety issues. 

7. Document fire history patterns on the refuge by collecting data on tree 

age annually, in association with inventory plots (see Objective 1) and by 

participating in research on Alaskan fire regimes during the life of this 

plan. 

Rationale: Our current knowledge of fire history patterns is insufficient to 

manage for natural fire regimes or adapt to potential habitat or population 

changes caused by climate change. Documentation of the fire history 

patterns on the refuge received high priority during a 2002 review of the 

refuge’s biological program. 

8. Conduct surveys to determine if non-native, invasive plant species are 

becoming established on the refuge.

Rationale: Non-native invasive plants can out-compete native plants 

and often have little or no value for wildlife. Currently, non-native white 

sweetclover is a common plant along the Dalton Highway, and seeds of 

this plant could disperse along rivers crossed by the highway. 

9. Determine the seasonal distribution (spawning and wintering areas) and 

migratory patterns of select species of whitefish (broad whitefish, humpback 

whitefish, and least cisco) within five years of adoption of this plan and 

assess the potential for similar studies of other resident fish such as pike and 

grayling. 

Rationale: The Kanuti Fisheries Management Plan (1993) documents 

issues and concerns regarding fisheries resources on the refuge, including 

an objective “to determine resident fish abundance and distribution in three 

major drainages of the Kanuti Refuge.”

10. Map spawning areas of anadromous fish and assess escapement of salmon 

within 10 years of adoption of this plan.

Rationale: This objective addresses data needs identified in the Kanuti 

Fisheries Management Plan (1993). Information gathered so far does not 

address spawning areas on the Koyukuk River above Henshaw Creek 

or in tributaries of the Kanuti River. If airboat or jetboat use increases 

significantly cooperative studies may be undertaken to determine if these 

uses affect fish spawning. 

11. Monitor snow depth and density at six snow markers on a monthly basis 

(December - May). 

Rationale: The amount and duration of snowfall on the refuge can affect a 

variety of factors, including distribution and overwinter survival of wildlife, 

timing of spring bird migration, spring flooding and nutrient input to lakes, 

and the timing and probability of fire the following spring. 

Research Institute for Fodder Crops, Ltd.Troubsko

Mike Spindler/USFWS

Measuring snow depth and density 

on the refuge.
33

12. Monitor the beaver population on the refuge by conducting fall aerial 

surveys of beaver food caches at 5-10 year intervals. 

Rationale: Beaver are an important resource for large predators and 

people, and their water manipulation activities influence habitats on the 

refuge. A technique for estimating the number of caches was tested with 

good results in 2002 and 2003, and this technique will become part of the 

refuge’s regular monitoring activities.

13. Estimate the number of wolves on the refuge in late winter at 3-5 year 

intervals. 

Rationale: Monitoring wolf numbers will help the refuge address 

management concerns by documenting the normal fluctuations in 

population size and distribution and assessing the potential effect of 

wolves on prey populations. 

14. Document winter abundance and distribution of caribou through 

monthly reconnaissance flights. 

Rationale: Caribou are periodic winter migrants onto the refuge and can 

provide hunting opportunity for humans and prey for wolves. 

15. Continue long-term studies of fire effects on small mammals and 

vegetation to document changes through different stages of forest 

succession during the life of the plan or until results indicate that the 

population and habitat has stabilized. 

Rationale: Both projects were started following large wildland fires in 

the early 1990s and contribute to the understanding of fire effects on 

vegetation and wildlife populations in interior Alaska.

16. Investigate and assess the feasibility of conducting surveys to index bear 

abundance in select refuge locations. 

Rationale: Little is known about the number of black and grizzly bears on 

the refuge. Refuge staff will assess existing and emerging techniques for 

monitoring bears to determine if there is a cost-effective, repeatable method 

that would suit its needs. 

17. Assess the feasibility of monitoring the distribution and abundance of 

snowshoe hares and other furbearers using aerial surveys of tracks. 

Rationale: Little is known about snowshoe hares and other furbearers on 

the refuge. New techniques, such as aerial videography of tracks in winter, 

should be assessed as tools to provide baseline data about snowshoe hares 

and furbearers and to monitor them over time. 

18. Contribute to continental, statewide, and bioregional monitoring efforts 

to establish trends in migratory landbird populations through annual 

participation in scientifically defensible, peer-recognized programs such 

as the continental Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) and Alaska Landbird 

Monitoring Survey (ALMS). Participation in these programs would include 

not only implementation, but assistance in the refinement and testing of 

procedures.

Rationale: Conservation of migratory birds in their natural diversity is part 

of the purposes of Kanuti Refuge. Migratory birds are also a Trust species of 

the Service. 

Aerial view of moose: Biologists 

conduct moose counts from low 

flying aircraft in late October to midNovember, as soon as there is a base 

of 10” of snow on the ground. The 

estimated moose population on the 

refuge has ranged from 588 to 2010, 

1989–2007. 

Glenn Stout/ADF&G

Randy Brown/USFWS

Results from studies using radio 

transmitters like this one on a broad 

whitefish (taaseze) showed that some 

whitefish within Kanuti Refuge 

migrate seasonally. 

USFWS

Beaver lodge on Kanuti Refuge
34

19. Continue to assist in annual monitoring of the Alaska mid-continent 

Greater White-fronted Goose population. 

Rationale: Greater White-fronted Geese are a Trust species, and are 

specifically mentioned in the refuge’s purposes. Biologists have been 

concerned about a possible decline in numbers of these geese. 

20. Assist USFWS-Migratory Bird Management in statewide programs, 

including but not limited to swan censuses. 

Rationale: Migratory waterfowl, including swans, are Trust species and 

are specifically mentioned for conservation in the refuge’s purposes. 

21. Determine current species composition of swans on the refuge.

Rationale: Both Trumpeter and Tundra Swans occur on the refuge. 

An intensive survey of nesting swans will determine if the species 

representation occurs in the same proportion as it did 20 years ago. 

22. Replicate (and where necessary, modify) the 1997 expanded aerial 

waterfowl breeding pair survey, in cooperation with USFWS-Migratory 

Bird Management, within the life of this plan. The survey should be 

conducted regularly (e.g., every five years) thereafter. The survey(s) 

should ensure adequate sampling for dabblers and divers/sea ducks.

Rationale: Waterfowl are a Trust species and specifically mentioned in the 

refuge’s purposes. The aerial line transect surveys of breeding waterfowl, 

conducted annually on the refuge since 1957 as part of the North American 

Waterfowl Breeding Pair Survey, are likely not representative of the 

refuge, nor do they take into consideration the potential necessity for 

different survey timing for dabbling ducks and diving/sea ducks. 

23. For those species of migratory birds that regularly breed on the refuge 

and are demonstrating long-term population declines, continue collaboration 

towards conservation, including monitoring, research, and outreach.

Rationale: Examples of such species include Horned Grebe, Lesser 

Yellowlegs, Solitary Sandpiper, Olive-sided Flycatcher, Blackpoll Warbler, 

and Rusty Blackbird. Refuge support could include providing study sites for 

projects, testing methods, and participating in working groups. 

24. Collaborate with the Boreal Program for Regional and International 

Shorebird Monitoring (Boreal PRISM) to help design and implement 

appropriate inventory and monitoring techniques for breeding and migrant 

shorebirds. 

Rationale: Little is known about temporary habitats for inland migrants 

and/or breeders. Also, populations of some boreal forest-breeding shorebird 

species are declining on a continental level. Investigation of habitats used 

and development of monitoring techniques will contribute to a more complete 

inventory of shorebirds and their habitats within the refuge. 

25. Design and implement a long-term waterfowl and waterbird production 

survey on the refuge. 

Rationale: A long-term study could provide information on relative 

abundance, productivity, survival, mortality, and habitats of waterfowl and 

other waterbirds and may be indicative of changes in the ecosystem, caused 

for example, by climate change. 

Northern Pintail (k’edzonule)

USFWS Wild North Photography/USFWS

White-fronted geese (k’edot’aagge’)

Adam Kokx/USFWS

Northern Shoveler nest

Luke Smithwick/USFWS

Hudsonian Godwit
35

Goal 2: Ensure the natural function and condition of water 

resources necessary to conserve fish and wildlife populations 

and habitats in their natural diversity. 

Objectives:

26. Develop a water resource inventory and assessment study plan in 

conjunction with the Service’s Water Resources Branch within the life of 

this plan. 

Rationale: This will aid in identifying and coordinating water research 

and data collection efforts on the refuge and will provide baseline water 

quality and quantity information. It will help our understanding of the 

significance of the hydrologic cycle in the refuge ecosystem. 

27. At the conclusion of the initial assessment, evaluate the need to 

continue monitoring streamflow and/or water quality conditions to support 

research or management objectives. 

Rationale: Sufficient water quality and quantity is critical to support fish, 

wildlife, and plants on the refuge. Few data are currently available about 

water resources. 

28. Formulate a strategy to inventory wetland and lake resources within 

the refuge, including aquatic plants, fish, wetland-dependent wildlife, 

aquatic invertebrates, and physical and chemical properties of lakes and 

wetlands. 

Rationale: Lakes and wetlands within refuge boundaries need to be 

described, including the plants and wildlife dependent on them, and a 

baseline for comparison for future conditions needs to be established. 

29. Formulate a strategy to inventory the river and stream resources 

within the refuge boundaries, including aquatic plants, river-dependent 

fish and wildlife, aquatic invertebrates, riparian and floodplain habitat, and 

physical and chemical properties of rivers and streams.

Rationale: Waters flowing through the refuge need to be described, 

including the natural hydrologic processes that create the dynamic 

habitats necessary to support the plants, wildlife and fisheries on the 

refuge.

30. Assess the feasibility of developing a hydrologic model for the refuge. 

Rationale: A hydrologic model would allow the refuge to track and predict 

changes in water resources, such as may be caused by climate change, and 

evaluate the effect of these changes on fish, wildlife, plants and people. 

Fall colors around wetlands on 

Kanuti Refuge 

The confluence (Hudokkakk’et) of the Kanuti River and the Koyukuk River 

is about 16 miles below Allakaket and Alatna and just outside of the refuge. 

Bill Raften/USFWS

Bill Raften/USFWS
36

Goal 3: Provide opportunities for local residents to pursue their 

subsistence lifestyle. 

Objectives:

31. As a continuing commitment, conduct annual informational meetings 

in each village associated with the refuge and regularly attend other 

subsistence-related meetings, providing information regarding the status of 

subsistence resources and their use, and commenting on proposals related to 

subsistence management within the refuge to maintain a respectful dialogue 

with refuge resource stakeholders and subsistence users. 

Rationale: Face-to-face meetings in local communities are the most effective 

forum for reviewing Federal subsistence harvest regulations and for 

discussing issues of local concern to subsistence users. 

32. Continue to work closely with stakeholders to address issues and concerns 

through the State and Federal regulatory processes as provided in ANILCA 

to conserve fish and wildlife. Stakeholders include Tribal Councils, the 

Koyukuk River State Fish and Game Advisory Committee, the Western 

Interior Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council, other local/regional 

working groups, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the Office of 

Subsistence Management. 

Rationale: The refuge is mandated by ANILCA to provide the opportunity 

for continued subsistence uses by local residents when consistent with other 

refuge purposes. It is essential that affected parties work cooperatively 

towards common subsistence goals. 

33. Develop a partnership with Tribal Councils, Alaska Department of Fish 

and Game Subsistence Division, and the Office of Subsistence Management 

to seek funding to review historical subsistence use data (hunting, trapping, 

and fishing), identify data gaps, and develop a research protocol that will 

incorporate western science and traditional ecological knowledge to document 

changing resource and use patterns.

Rationale: An effective strategy for providing continued subsistence 

opportunities and managing for healthy populations of fish, wildlife and 

plants should take into account all available historical and current knowledge 

of subsistence activities, relying on scientific data as well as traditional 

ecological knowledge gained through partnerships with local communities, 

Tribal representatives, and other organizations.

34. Work with stakeholders to develop and implement a subsistence harvest 

monitoring plan to conserve migratory bird populations for continued 

subsistence use. Stakeholders include Tribal Councils, Alaska Department of 

Fish and Game Subsistence Division, the Office of Subsistence Management, 

Alaska Migratory Bird Co-management Council, and the Interior Region 

Management Body (Tanana Chiefs Conference). 

Rationale: ANILCA and a recent amendment to the Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act direct us to conserve migratory birds for continued subsistence use and 

document traditional migratory bird harvest levels. A migratory bird harvest 

monitoring plan and implementation protocol based on an accurate estimate 

of harvest are needed to ensure long-term conservation of Trust species and 

continued opportunity for subsistence use. 

Blueberry abundance varies from 

year to year. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Fishcamp after season: Salmon 

fishing occurs from July through 

September, then the emphasis shifts 

toward whitefish until ice starts 

flowing in October. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Spring harvest of waterfowl is 

considered a customary and 

traditional part of subsistence and 

has been legalized with a recent 

amendment to the Migratory Bird 

Treaty Act. 

Luke Smithwick/USFWS
37

Goal 4: Provide opportunities for quality public use and enjoyment 

of refuge resources in ways that minimize conflicts among 

user groups through compatible wildlife-dependent recreation 

activities, including hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and 

photography. 

Objectives:

35. Review methods of monitoring levels and types of public use, and 

implement new methodology if determined appropriate. 

Rationale: Accurate public use data is a critical component in evaluating 

existing levels of service to the public, and in ensuring recreational uses 

remain compatible with the purposes of the refuge. 

36. Continue to provide a range of opportunities for multi-day recreational 

trips within the refuge which allow the public to experience and explore 

the dynamic landscape and wildlife of the refuge in solitude, incorporating 

various methods of access. 

Rationale: Many visitors and local residents who go to the refuge are 

seeking a remote and wild experience. The mode of access utilized 

(floatplane, snowmobile, canoe, etc.) will shape the desired experience.

37. Working with community and State and Federal authorities, develop a 

comprehensive law enforcement program with an emphasis on educating 

visitors to prevent violations. 

Rationale: To enhance visitor experiences and help protect refuge 

resources, the refuge needs a good strategy for improving visitor safety 

and compliance with existing rules and regulations. Violations do occur 

but are not always intentional and often are due to misunderstandings, 

misinformation, or lack of knowledge. 

38. Assess and evaluate levels and patterns of snowmobile use on the 

refuge and off-road vehicle (ORV) use on adjacent and private lands within 

refuge boundaries.

Rationale: Snowmobile and ORV use on and near the refuge must be 

monitored carefully to ensure that activities minimize wildlife disturbance 

and prevent impacts to habitat.

39. Continue working with Evansville Incorporated, the National Park 

Service, Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, and 

the City of Bettles to design and build an interpretive nature trail near 

Bettles on land adjacent to the northern boundary of the refuge.

Rationale: This interpretive trail would present a unique 

opportunity for visitors and local residents of Bettles to view 

wildlife living in and utilizing habitats typical of the refuge. 

Commercial air taxi operators and transporters 

provide the most common means of access for 

recreational visitors. 

Most local residents use outboard 

motorboats for river travel. Much of 

the Koyukuk River (Kk’uyetl’ots’ene)

is easy to navigate, but even wide, long 

stretches can be challenging during 

low water levels because of submerged 

sandbars. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS USFWS

Most non-local visitors travel rivers 

within the refuge by inflatable raft, 

canoe, or small motorized boat. 

Camping along one of the many rivers 

within the refuge is a unique and 

memorable experience. 
38

Goal 5: Provide outreach, environmental education, and 

interpretive programs to develop/increase a sense of stewardship 

for wildlife, cultural resources, and the environment, and to 

enhance visitor experiences on the refuge. 

Objectives:

40. Update the 1992 Environmental Education and Interpretative Plan, 

reviewing and revising periodically as necessary. 

Rationale: A well planned strategy for conducting environmental 

education and interpretive programs will help provide for public 

understanding of refuge resources, issues, and public uses.

41. Continue to provide the public with timely and accurate information 

about the refuge through a wide variety of communication tools; 

re-evaluate the tools utilized and update and correct information at least 

twice annually.

Rationale: Currently the refuge utilizes a variety of communication 

tools (e.g., an internet website, newsletter, brochures, etc.). These tools 

can provide the public with accurate information but only if periodically 

evaluated and updated.

42. In partnership with the Bureau of Land Management and the National 

Park Service, continue providing interpretive and educational experiences 

to visitors at the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center in Coldfoot by 

contributing staff and operational support.

Rationale: The Arctic Interagency Visitor Center is located in the Dalton 

Highway Corridor and in recent years, has hosted more than 8,000 visitors 

annually. It presents an invaluable opportunity to inform the public about 

all aspects of the Kanuti Refuge.

43. In Fairbanks, Bettles, Evansville, Allakaket, Alatna, and Coldfoot, 

participate when possible in community events, festivals, and programs that 

will facilitate education and interpretation of Service and refuge goals. 

Rationale: Participation in community-based events provides opportunities 

to inform the public, and to build community support for the refuge.

44. Expand opportunities for individuals, organized groups, and families to 

learn about the refuge through activities including environmental education 

programs, nature walks, and interpretive programs.

Rationale: Such opportunities can prepare visitors to have safe and enjoyable 

experiences on the refuge, as well as educate a variety of audiences about 

conservation topics or refuge issues.

45. As opportunities arise, provide classroom visits and educational materials 

as requested by educators in the Yukon-Koyukuk School District.

Rationale: Increased cooperation between the refuge and the YukonKoyukuk School District will improve environmental awareness among youth 

and the general public.

46. Work closely with the National Park Service to operate and maintain the 

bunkhouse and other facilities built in Bettles in 2008 to replace the facility 

that burned in January 2004.

Rationale: Approximately 400 people visit the shared visitor facility in 

Bettles annually, with another 3,000 people contacting the station each year 

seeking information about the park and refuge. This facility is the closest 

many people will ever come to the refuge. Quality facilites in Bettles will 

allow the Service to enhance land stewardship and better serve the public by 

providing a place to learn about resources within and around the refuge.

The Kanuti Refuge provides U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service representation at 

the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center 

in Coldfoot. 

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Barry Whitehill /USFWS

Refuge staff assisted young hunters 

at the FWS-sponsored Steel Shot 

Clinic in Allakaket in 2005.

The visitor facility in Bettles shared 

with the National Park Service is as 

close as many people will ever come to 

the refuge. 

The bunkhouse in Bettles was built 

in cooperation with the National 

Park Service in 2008.

Mike Spindler /USFWS

Mike Spindler /USFWS
39

Goal 6: Foster an appreciation for the cultural resources of the 

refuge through conservation and interpretation.

Objectives:

47. Update, compile, and organize the refuge cultural resource atlas and 

database to include all known historical and archaeological sites, place 

names, and paleontological locality information. Identify priority areas 

to inventory for archaeological and other cultural sites and conduct 

surveys as time and personnel allow. Perform surveys at a level sufficient 

to evaluate the eligibility of identified sites to the National Register of 

Historic Places. 

Rationale: Very little is known about the cultural resources of the Kanuti 

Refuge. Compiling all known information will make it possible to evaluate 

information needs and set priorities for surveys and research. 

48. Seek out and develop partnerships with Native corporations, 

universities, other government agencies, etc., to cooperatively inventory, 

manage, and protect cultural and historical resources.

Rationale: Cooperative projects with museums, universities, Tribal 

entities, Native corporations, and other institutions allow parties to 

pool scarce resources and increase the amount and the quality of work 

completed. 

49. Update the refuge’s Cultural Resources Guide by 2011 (15 years after 

it was first completed). 

Rationale: Updating this step-down plan will allow refuge staff to better 

understand where they should concentrate inventory and survey efforts.

50. In cooperation with the communities of Allakaket, Alatna, Bettles, 

and Evansville, develop a plan or products using existing traditional place 

names information for the refuge. 

Rationale: Place names contain an enormous amount of information on 

traditional uses, culturally significant places, historical camps and 

settlements, and other culturally important information. Existing 

information is an untapped archive that could mutually benefit the four 

communities of Allakaket, Alatna, Bettles, and Evansville as well as the 

refuge, recognizing the significant role of local people in the natural and 

cultural heritage of the refuge. 

This artifact, a sidescraper (possibly 

‘daa’oghe), was found on the refuge in 

2006. Sidescrapers were used to clean 

hides and carve wood and bone. This 

type of tool was used during several 

eras so it is not possible to determine 

its precise age. This example is small 

(~11⁄2”) and we assume that it may 

have been used for fine skin work by 

the ancestors of the Koyukon people 

roughly 1,000 years ago. 

Adam Kokx/USFWS

Pump and pulleys at the Union City Townsite - remnants of 

turn-of-the-century mining activities on the refuge.

USFWS
40

In fiscal year (FY) 2008, the refuge had a staff of five full-time permanent and three part-time and/or seasonal 

employees assigned solely to Kanuti. Permanent employees included a refuge manager/pilot, a deputy refuge 

manager, a lead wildlife biologist, and an avian wildlife biologist. Part-time and seasonal employees included a park 

ranger (stationed at the Arctic Interagency Visitor Center), one biological technician, and one maintenance worker. 

For efficiency, considerable sharing of staff occurs among the three refuges with offices co-located in Fairbanks 

(Kanuti, Arctic, and Yukon Flats). One full-time permanent and one part-time administrative staffers were assigned 

to the Kanuti Refuge but shared among Kanuti, Arctic, and Yukon Flats Refuges. In addition, a fire management 

officer (FMO), and assistant fire management officer and a fire management specialist were assigned to the Kanuti 

Refuge to serve all three Fairbanks-based refuges. A subsistence coordinator, two law enforcement officers, two 

information technology specialists, and a maintenance worker/pilot are supervised by Yukon Flats and Arctic 

Refuges but are shared by the three Fairbanks-based refuges. Additional law enforcement officers at Arctic and 

Yukon Flats Refuges assist Kanuti Refuge when needed. Kanuti Refuge’s base budget in FY2008 was $928,000. 

This will be reduced by $94,000 in 2009 (and beyond) to reflect administrative restructuring. To maintain the current 

staffing situation in the short term (less than three years), this present level of funding, adjusted for inflation, would 

be required. Long-term budget and staffing goals (3–15 years) provide for implementation of projects identified 

in the CCP Goals and Objectives, and Refuge Operational Needs System (RONS) to accommodate anticipated 

increases in subsistence and recreational demands. 

Currently identified essential staffing, mission-critical projects, and an increase in recurring base funds to 

implement projects include: (values are in 2008 dollars)

•	 An increase of $105,000 in base funds to provide for and support an airplane pilot position within the next three 

years; this function will be combined with a biologist, manager or maintenance worker; it may be based in 

Bettles or in Fairbanks;

•	 An increase of $74,000 in recurring base funds to provide for and support a maintenance worker in Bettles or 

Evansville;

•	 An increase of $48,000 to provide for and support an office automation clerk that would be shared among the 

three Fairbanks-based refuges;

•	 An increase of $59,000 to provide for and support an interpretive park ranger or outreach specialist in Bettles or 

in Fairbanks;

•	 An increase of $72,000 to provide for and support a general biologist for aquatic environments to address 

important objectives in this plan; and

•	 An increase of $27,000 to provide for and support a refuge information technician in Allakaket or Alatna. This 

position may be contracted for directly with the local Tribe.

•	 One-time construction projects include approximately $325,000 for energy efficiency and renewable energy 

upgrades to three buildings in Bettles. An additional $200,000 will be requested to add a garage and improve 

energy efficiency at the maintenance shop in Bettles.

Seasonal employees and volunteers play an important role in refuge operations. The number of seasonal employees 

and volunteers could vary considerably from year to year depending upon projects and budgets. In fiscal year 2008 

Kanuti enjoyed the benefits of 26 volunteers who contributed more than 2,900 hours of service. The refuge was 

fortunate in 2008 and it is not likely that this level of volunteer assistance will be sustainable in the long-term. It is 

more likely that some of these duties will have to be performed by paid employees or that the projects will be put on 

hold. 

Funding and Personnel Requirements
41

Item

Short-Term 

Implementation 

(<3 years)

Long-Term 

Implementation 

(3–15 years)

Annual Recurring Base Budget + Fire Preparedness Fundinga $1,336,606 $2,391,606

Permanent Full Time (PFT) Employees assigned to Kanuti 9.6 15.1

Permanent Part-Time (PPT) assigned to Kanuti 1 2

Permanent Full Time Kanuti NWR employees not shared with 

other Fairbanks-based refuges:

Refuge Manager/Pilot

Deputy Refuge Manager

Lead Wildlife Biologist

Wildlife Biologist (Avian)

Administrative Support Assistant

Long-term positions to be added (RONS proposals):

Airplane Pilot/Park Ranger or Airplane Pilot/Biologist - PFT- Bettles or 

Fairbanks

Maintenance Worker - PFT - Bettles

Interpretive Park Ranger or Outreach Specialist - PFT - Bettles 

Biologist (aquatics or fisheries) - PFT - Fairbanks

Refuge Information Technician - PPT- Allakaket or Alatnab

5 9.5

Permanent Kanuti NWR employees shared with both Yukon 

Flats and Arctic NWRs:

Administrative Officer 

Fire Management Officer

Assistant Fire Management Officer - PFT - Fairbanks

Fire Management Specialist - PFT - Fairbanks

Interpretive Park Ranger (Coldfoot - PPT - 24 hr./week)

Long-term positions to be added (RONS proposals):

Office Automation Clerk - PFT - Fairbanks

4.6 5.6

Permanent Yukon Flats NWR employees shared with both Kanuti 

and Arctic NWRs:

Subsistence Coordinator 

Law Enforcement Officer

2 2

Permanent Arctic NWR employees shared with both Kanuti and 

Yukon Flats NWRs:

Information Technology Specialists (2)

Maintenance Worker/Pilot

Law Enforcement Officer

4 4

Seasonal Employees assigned to Kanuti NWRc 2 4

Seasonal Volunteers assigned to Kanuti NWRc 2 4

a Based on FY 2008 base budget minus $94,000 to reflect restructuring of the administrative team plus $216,606 to reflect 

restructuring of the fire management program 

b RIT function may be contracted with the Tribe rather than filled as a Service employee.

c Numbers of seasonal employees and volunteers will probably increase but will vary from year to year.
42

Christopher Harwood /USFWS

Implementation and Monitoring

Step-down Plans

Implementation of the Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan will be accomplished, 

in part, through various step-down plans, each with its own program focus. Step-down plans deal with specific 

management strategies and implementation schedules and provide details necessary to implement management 

strategies identified in the CCP. Step-down plans for Kanuti Refuge include the following: 

Fisheries Management Plan

The 1993 Kanuti Fisheries Management Plan (FMP) provides a 

description of habitats and fish species known or expected to occur within 

the refuge. It identifies the four purposes of the refuge as goals, provides 

objectives for each goal, and lists tasks designed to meet the objectives. 

Many of the 11 objectives listed in the 1993 FMP have not or only partially 

been addressed. Progress has been made in the following areas: 

•	 monitoring escapement of salmon stocks with the operation of 

Henshaw Creek weir;

•	 determining resident fish abundance and distribution in three major 

drainages using radio telemetry in whitefish; and 

•	 monitoring and evaluating subsistence harvest of fish species within 

the refuge. 

The FMP is to be updated every five years. 

Inventory and Monitoring Plan

An Inventory and Monitoring plan (I&M plan) consist of two main 

components:

•	 a discussion of a refuge’s biological priorities and objectives and how 

these were determined; and

•	 protocols for meeting these priorities and objectives. 

The refuge does not have an I&M plan, but it is scheduled to complete one 

by 2009. Biological priorities were discussed during a 2002 review of the 

refuge’s biological program which will form the basis for the discussion 

portion of the I&M plan. 

Cultural Resource Guide

The 1996 Cultural Resource Guide assists refuge staff in meeting legal 

requirements to protect and manage the cultural resources of the refuge. It 

describes the current state of knowledge of the prehistory and history of the 

region and outlines roles and responsibilities. It includes a list of projects that 

would fill in gaps in knowledge or complete existing work. This guide is to be 

updated in 2012. 

Environmental Education and Interpretative Plan

The 1992 Environmental Eduction and Interpretative (EE&I) Plan gives 

guidance to refuge staff regarding educational and outreach programs. 

It describes efforts within the communities near the refuge, specifically 

within schools. This plan will be rewritten after the completion of this 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan. 

Kanuti Refuge cooperates with the 

Office of Subsistence Management, 

Fisheries Resources, and Tanana 

Chiefs Conference to support a 

salmon escapement monitoring 

project at the Henshaw Creek fish 

weir.

Mike Spindler /USFWS

Spruce Grouse
43

Fire Management Plan

The Fire Management Plan describes how the refuge would respond in a 

wildland fire situation. Refuge fire management needs have been classified 

with regard to land and resource management objectives, and resource and 

structure protection needs. This plan was completed in 2007. 

Land Protection Plan

The 2002 Kanuti Refuge Land Protection Plan focuses on private lands within 

the refuge boundaries with the goal of identifying and conserving highquality habitat on those lands. Land conservation measures will be pursued 

only with landowners who are willing to work with the Service. The refuge 

and landowners are not obligated to undertake any of the measures identified. 

Station Safety Plan, Fire Emergency Evacuation Plan, and Station Security Plan

These plans focus on providing a safe and healthful environment for 

employees and visitors. They aim to minimize the potential for injury to 

employees and the public and to prevent property damage. All plans are 

reviewed annually. 

Water Resources Inventory and Assessment: Plan of Study

This plan guides a six-year inventory and assessment of the water resources 

on the refuge. Results of the study will be used to quantify in-stream flow 

water rights for the maintenance and protection of fish and wildlife habitat. 

The plan will be completed in 2009. Implementation will be determined by 

budget and personnel availability. 

Environmental Management Plan 

This plan was updated in 2005 and then again in 2008. It identifies and ranks 

field station activities, products, and services that affect the environment, and 

it sets goals and measurable targets to improve environmental performance 

relative to field station operations and impacts. 

Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan

This 2000 plan outlines the procedures, methods, and equipment used at the 

refuge to comply with Environmental Protection Agency oil spill prevention, 

control, and countermeasure standards. This plan is reviewed every three 

years by the Regional Spill Coordinator. 

Horsetail is widespread in the boreal 

forest.

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS Wild North Photography/USFWS

Windswept snow surface

Wild North Photography/USFWS

Red fox hunting for voles under 

the snow.
44

Luke Smithwick/USFWS Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges

Partnership Opportunities

The CCP implementation process also includes identifying partnership opportunities that may assist in 

accomplishing refuge objectives. Partnerships with other organizations are among the ways the Service fulfills its 

mission: “Working with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the 

continuing benefit of the American people.”

The refuge exists within a dynamic ecosystem. Many of the resources within the refuge are of regional, State, 

national, and international importance. We recognize that the public, organizations and other governmental agencies 

have interests in the refuge. Implementation of many refuge programs requires involvement from these interested 

parties. Among others, refuge staff has coordinated activities with the following:

•	 State of Alaska

•	 Other Federal Agencies (e.g., National Park Service, Bureau of Land 

Management)

•	 Western Interior Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council

•	 Migratory Bird Co-management Council

•	 Alatna, Allakaket, and Evansville village councils

•	 K’oyitl’ots’ina and Evansville village corporations

•	 Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc. (Regional Native non-profit 

organization)

•	 Doyon, Inc. (Regional Native Corporation)

•	 City of Bettles

•	 City of Allakaket

•	 Bettles Chamber of Commerce

•	 Universities and museums

•	 Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce

•	 Nongovernmental organizations (e.g., Friends of Alaska National 

Wildlife Refuges, Alaska Natural History Association, Ducks 

Unlimited, Alaska Bird Observatory, Friends of Creamer’s Field)

Aerial surveys of wolves and their 

tracks to estimate wolf abundance 

on the refuge are done in cooperation 

with the Alaska Department of Fish 

and Game (ADF&G). 

The Arctic Interagency Visitor Center 

in Coldfoot, which opened in 2003, 

is operated by the Bureau of Land 

Management in cooperation with the 

National Park Service and the Fish 

and Wildlife Service.

Members of Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges and Americorps, 

in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park 

Service, and the Fish and Wildlife Service have helped fight invasive weeds 

on the Dalton Highway to reduce risks to the refuge.
45

Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring helps refuge staff 

track the progress of plan 

implementation. Results of 

monitoring activities show how 

objectives are being achieved 

and measure progress towards 

accomplishing goals. Many of the 

objectives in refuge step-down 

plans involve collection of baseline 

data that may lead to additional 

monitoring efforts. The step-down 

plans will provide detailed methods 

and frequencies for inventory and 

monitoring activities. 

Plan Amendment and Revision

Periodic review and revision of this comprehensive conservation plan will 

be necessary. As knowledge of refuge resources, users, and uses improves, 

changes in management may be identified. Fish and wildlife populations, user 

groups, adjacent land uses, and other management considerations change 

with time, often in unforeseen ways. Challenges also may be encountered in 

trying to implement the plan.

Revisions are a necessary part of the adaptive management approach used by 

the Service. This means that objectives and strategies to reach goals can be 

adjusted. Most of the resulting changes will fine-tune the plan. These changes 

will not require modification of this document because minor changes will be 

addressed in the more detailed refuge step-down and annual work plans. Only 

if a major change is required in management of the refuge will it be necessary 

to revise this plan with a new environmental assessment.

To enable refuge users, adjacent landowners, local, State, and Federal 

agencies, and other interested parties to express their views on how the 

refuge is being managed, the refuge will periodically hold meetings or use 

other techniques such as comment cards and surveys to solicit comments for 

evaluation purposes. By encouraging continuing public input, the refuge will 

be better able to serve the public, anticipate potential problems, and take 

immediate action to resolve existing problems.

Every three to five years, refuge staff will review public comments, local and 

State government recommendations, staff recommendations, research 

studies, and other sources to determine if revisions to the plan are necessary. 

If major changes are proposed, public meetings may be held, and a new 

environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement may be 

necessary. Full review and updating of the conservation plan will occur every 

15 years. 

Wild North Photography/USFWS

Steve Hillebrand/USFWS

Luke Smithwick/USFWS

Muskrat (bekenaale) on Kanuti 

Refuge

Refuge scenery

The wood frog (noghuye) has the 

ability to freeze as much as 35 to 45 

percent of its body during the cold 

winter months.


U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Division of Conservation Planning and Policy

1011 E. Tudor Rd, MS 231

Anchorage, AK 99503

http://www.fws.gov

http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/planning/index.htm

http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/planning/kanpol.htm

http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/kanuti/index.htm

September 2008