Research Mensurationist

Bill Farr's long-term

research in Alaska spanned

the years from 1960 until

his death in 1995 and laid

the foundation tor research

alternatives for

clearcutting. Here, he

measures tree size and

height with an optical

dendrometer. (Juneau,

unnumbered)

Doug Swanston (right) and Keith Kahklen

(left) installing surface-erosion equipment

on Hippoback Ridge on Chichagot Island in

1993. (Swanston collection)

answers to questions that otten were difficult to address within the framework of scientific inquiry. A policy memorandum from the PNW Station in 1981 identified classification of oldgrowth forest community types and studies of the potential to improve wildlife habitat with silvicultural treatments as "the most critical research concerns in Southeast Alaska,"65 but the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC), in 1 984, argued that Forest Service policy to comply

with ANILCA mandates for timber sales could not be reconciled with multiple-use objectives of

protecting wildlife, fish, and people in Alaska. Research proceeded from the legalistic premise

that the timber would be cut and studied how logging would affect the environment and how

those effects might be minimized or managed to protect multiple-use objectives, but critics of the

Forest Service and the agency's implementation of ANILCA mandates argued that the timber sales

were excessive, economically irrational, ecologically unsustainable, and hostile to multiple-use

objectives. The Southeast Alaska Conservation Council further accused federal agencies, particularly the Forest Service, of subsidizing corporate efforts to strip the land of its timber wealth,

and they claimed that the proper question was not how the timber sales would affect the environment, but whether the timber should be cut, where, how, and at what rates.66 As this debate

raged on, the PNW Station reorganized administration of Research in southeast Alaska.

Calvin Bey assumed control of the Multiproject Program at Juneau about the time the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council's challenge to Forest Service management policies on theTongass

hit the press in 1984, and he assumed responsibilty for coordinating external relations with Region 10, the University of Alaska, the Alaska State Legislature, Native Corporations, Alaska state

agencies, and all federal agencies. PNW Station Director Ethington also established a Program

65 Pacition Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, "Planned Forest and Related Research to Meet

Requirement of the 1980 Alaska National interest I ands Conservation Act" (typescript memo, no

author, 14 July 1981), p. 7.

66 Soulheasl Alaska Conservation Countil, The Tongass Timber Problem: What You Can Do About It

(|uneau Fongass Accountability Project. 1984),3-9.

181

This file was created by scanning the printed publication. 

Text errors identified by the software have been corrected; 

however, some errors may remain. 
Management Committee consisting of PNW Assistant Directors-North (Wright) and Central (Flora),

the Program Leader (Bey), and the Deputy Regional Forester for Region 10 (Michael Barton). This

committee was responsible tor prioritizing and authorizing proposals eligible for funding under

ANILCA guidelines and for".. .cooperating with Region 10 to incorporate research into managment

practices.67

Within this framework ot coordinating committees, Forest Management gained a direct voice

(in the person of the Deputy Regional Forester) in the decisions that guided Research in the

second half of the decade. Project leaders involved in the Multiproject Program at Juneau were

required to meet annually with the committee to explain their research plans, report on their

progress, and disc uss funcling issues. Scientists seeking support under the program were required

to submit research proposals, and the Program Management Committee reviewed each proposal

and assigned it a priority ranking for the purpose of assigning funds.68 This process of competitive

grantsmanship pitted scientists against each other and directly exposed Research to the political

pressures confronting Forest Management in southeast Alaska. Researchers from outside the

agency also competed with Forest Service scientists for ANILCA funds. The ANILCA and theTTSF

protected Juneau from the funding crisis that afflicted Fairbanks during the 1980s, but they also

represented an erosion of the principle that the Research Branch should be funded independently

of Forest Management in the Forest Service.

Scientists at juneau operated within the framework and constraints established by Congress,

the Washington Office, and PNW Station to further a research agenda consistent with the tradiDoug Swansion sampling roots lor laboratory

testing of tensile strength by size and species at

Stoney Creek on Prime of Wale's Island in

1976.(Swanston collection)

Don Spalinger measuring the intake rate

and bite size for deer in a foraging study

by Tom Hanley's unit at the juneau FSL.

(Hanley collection)

67Research Work Unit Description, Management Alternatives for Timber and Related Resources,

Juneau, Alaska, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 6 July 1984," (in storage room,

Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service), n.p.

68 Research Work Unit Description, Management Alternatives for Timber and Related Resources,

Juneau, Alaska, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 6 July 1984," in storage room,

Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory. USDA Forest Service, n.p.

182
Bill Meehan in the mainstream, ca.

1993'. (Meehan collection)

Project Leader John Henley. (Hanley

collection >

tions of the Forest Research

community in Alaska, the

professional priorities of the

staff, and the availability of

funding. At the time Bey assumed control as Program

Leader at Juneau, ANILCA

funding to the PNW Station

amounted to an annual appropriation of $1.67 million

in support of the Multiproject

Program.69 This allocation

more than doubled the regular appropriation for the two

Research Work Units based

in Juneau at the time. The

initial framework for the Multiproject Program defined three "Research Problems" and their interrelations, including scientists responsible for solving each component of the problem and cooperating agencies. These problems included the need to identify: the effects of old-growth silvicultural systems on resource productivity; the effects of second-growth management systems on

resource productivity; and the optimum rate ot resource consumption and matching demands.

Station Research Work Units responsible for addressing these questions included Meehan's Anadromous Fish Habitat unit and Bey's Timber-Wildlife-Watershed-Diseases unit at Juneau, as well as

units in Recreation and Forest Engineering, based in Seattle, Washington; units in Utilization,

Production Economics, and Foreign Trade, based in Portland, Oregon; and a unit in Resource

Management Impacts, based in Corvallis, Oregon.70

The sudden infusion of funding, the urgent focus and demand for Research, administrative

shakeups, and budgetary cutbacks in other areas of the Forest Service promoted an intense flurry

of proposals, studies, and publications at mid decade from scientists at the Juneau Lab and elsewhere in the Forest Service or with cooperating agencies. This burst of scientific inquiry71 coincided with the revolution in computing technology at mid decade, and it came hard on the heels

of the third wave of Forest Research in the late 1960s and 1970s that had expanded the range of

69 Former Deputy Chief tor Research Robert Buckman recalls that only about 50% of this amount was

available to grant applicants from outside the Forest Service. Interview with Robert Buckman, 12 July

1995.

70 Research Work Unit Description, Management Alternatives for Timber and Related Resources,

Juneau, Alaska, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, 6 July 1984," in storage room,

Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service, n.p.

71'Research Attainment Descriptions, PNW/RWU-1652/|uneau, AK, FY 1983, 1984, 1985" (in storage

room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service); "Research Attainment Descriptions,

PNW/RWU-1705/Juneau, AK, FY 1983. 1984. 1985, in storage room," Juneau Forestry Sciences

Laboratory, USDA Forest Service.

183
John Henley in the Juneau FSL overlooking

downtown Juneau. Note the cruise ship

docked at right. The FSL later moved from the

Federal Building to a building north of the

airport and nearer the Mendenhall Glacier, in

a move that also placed more physical

distance between the scientists and Region to

forest managers headquartered in the Federal

Building. (Loopstra collection)

Art Shipper (left), John Henley (right), and deer (center).

Tongass Timber Supply Fund guidelines identified deer as the

"priority species for which habitat research is being conducted.

(Hanlev collection)

issues by promoting a broader understanding of ecological relations. As one scientist observed,

"there was more environmental awareness by everybody, better funding for research in fields

previously neglected, and better knowledge of where the problems are..."72 Scientists in Juneau

were less isolated from their colleagues outside Alaska, more aware of the broader implications

of their research, and constantly reminded of the political interests looking over their shoulders.

The result was an array ol studies that developed comparisons among forests in Alaska and those

further south, but in many ways, scientists still struggled with the need to establish baseline data

as the foundation for further research.

The search tor improved and alternative management practices that would ensure a continuous supply of timber while protecting other forest resources involved Farr, Sidle, Bormann, and

Harris in studies that identified shelterwood and selection-cutting alternatives for forest managers

concerned with protecting nontimber resources while still fulfilling ANILCA mandates. These

studies summarized information on the characteristics, properties, and potential uses of Alaskacedar, Sitka spruce, and red alder within their native ranges.73 Swanston and Sidle also explored

problems of slope stability and soil cohesion in heavily logged areas and implications of this

problem for road engineers and forest management."74

Efforts to determine habitat requirements for wildlife and recommend management practices

appropriate to those needs involved Hanley, Thilenius, Van Ballenberghe, and Meehan in interdisciplinary, cooperative studies that explored habitat issues in relation to wildlife behavior, ro~

72Interview with Bill Farr, 9 August 1993.

73Reseaich Attainment Description, PNW-1652, Problem 1, PNW Station, Fiscal Year 1984," in storage

room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, LJSDA Forest Service).

74Research Attainment Description, PNW-1652, Problem 3, PNW Station, Fiscal Year 1985," in storage

room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service); "Research Attainment Description,

PNW-MPP-I, Problem I, PNW Station, Fiscal Year 1985," in storage room, Juneau Forestry Sciences

Laboratory USDA Forest Service.

184
dent populations, native forage, and nutrient requirements. In related, cooperative studies also

funded by the work unit at Juneau, Wildlife Biologist Paul Alaback also compared the forest

structure of secondary succession communities with old-growth forest structure in southeast Alaska

and its implications for wildlife management, and Meehan and Hanley explored fish and wildlife

relations in old-growth forests. Hanley also addressed disturbance events as ecological factors in

old-growth forests and the theoretical implications of this process for forest managers concerned

with timber harvests on those forests.75

Studies of the habitat requirements of anadromous salmonids also gained a powerful boost

after ANILCA. Fishery Biologist Mason Bryant, Meehan, Aquatic Ecologist James Sedell (from the

Corvallis Forestry Sciences Laboratory), and other cooperators drew Tongass Fund support for

studies of coho salmon in southeast Alaska, and discovered that lack of suitable winter habitat

might limit its smolt production. They also documented a relation between fish habitat and large

organic debris, and linked removal of that debris over the preceding 100 years with significant

reductions of adequate winter habitat in streams of southeast Alaska.76

In keeping with broader trends in the research community at Juneau after ANILCA, leadership

of the Multiproject Program abruptly shifted in July 1986 from a man whose background was

primarily in Forest Science, to a man whose background was primarily in Forest Management,

Forest Products, and Research Administration. John Henley, who replaced Forest Geneticist Calvin

Bey as Program Leader, left his position as Assistant Director for Plans and Applications at the

Southern Research Station to accept his new assignment in Juneau, and he continued the trend

toward hiring production-oriented staff with roots in the academic traditions of forestry programs

in the western mountain states and the Pacific Northwest.77

Henley held B.S. and M.S. degrees in forest management from Colorado State University, and

an M.S. in forest products from the University of Washington. His prior experience with the

Forest Service included assignments with theTimber Quality Research Unit at the PNW Station in

Portland from 1961 to 1973 and the Forest Residues and Energy Unit in Seattle from 1973 to

1980. Since 1980, he had served as Assistant Station Director for Plans and Applications at the

Southern Station. His most prominent accomplishment before his appointment at Juneau was a

group award in 1986 for his administrative involvement in the development of an electronic

75

 Paul B. Alaback, Secondary Succession Following Logging, in the Sitka Spruce-Western Hemlock

Forests of Southeast Alaska: Implications for Wildlife Management (Portland, OR: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Gen. Tech. Rep.

PNW-173, 1984); "Research Attainment Description, PNW-1652, Problem No. 2, PNW Station, Fiscal

Year 1985" (looted in storage room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service);

"Research Attainment Description, PNW-1652, Problem 2, PNW Station, Fiscal Year 1984," in storage

room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service; "Research Attainment Description,

PNW-MPP-1, Problem 2, PNW Station, Fiscal Year 1985," in storage room, Juneau Forestry Sciences

Laboratory, USDA Forest Service.

76

 Research Attainment Description, PNW-1705, Problem 1, PNW Station, Fiscal Year 1985," in storage

room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service.

77

 Professional Biography Files, Central History Files, PNW-Portland Office; PNW News, 9 June 1986.

185
system for reporting research attainment for the entire Forest Service, and he had served as the

line officer who coordinated activities with Washington Office staff and Station personnel.78 His

career path to administrative responsibility for Research in Juneau was not unlike that of Taylor or

Helmers, both of whom parlayed experience in the Washington Office into appointments in

Alaska. Like Taylor, he also brought a strong emphasis on the priorities of Forest Management to

his position with Research.

When Henley arrived at Juneau in summer 1986, the projected budget for Tongass funds

totaled $2.14 million for FY 1987 and $2.1 million for FY 1988, and PNW Station priorities for

expending those funds emphasized (in order) research on timber management, improvements in

harvesting technology, improvements in fish production, management practices to minimize impacts on soil and water, management practices for Sitka black-tailed deer, economics of marketing and management, improved utilization of harvested timber, and management practices to

enhance recreation opportunities and uses. The guidelines identified deer as the "priority species

for which habitat research is being conducted" and noted that research programs related to recreation uses would "focus on determining the consequences of timber management alternatives

on resident and tourist recreation uses..."79

These priorities were a reflection of the ANILCA mandate and Forest Service guidelines for

appropriating Research funds from the Tongass Timber Supply Fund, and they illustrated the dramatic shift in budgetary priorities from integrated studies of forest ecology to production-oriented

research with specific, utilitarian purposes dictated by political and administrative forces governing forest resources in Alaska. Scientists at Juneau increasingly emphasized the need for integrated studies that recognized the complex interactions of the ecosystem, but the administrative

framework imposed by ANILCA and Forest Service priorities for line-item programs supported

with the Tongass Timber Supply Fund often seemed to frustrate those concerns by narrowing the

focus of research to production-oriented questions and issues.

Henley arrived at the end of an era for Research in Alaska, as Assistant Director-North Ken

Wright announced his retirement effective January 1987. Wright had played a central role at the

PNW Station in shaping the direction of Research in Alaska for nearly two decades, and he

continued in a volunteer role after his retirement in an effort to rally support and funding for

projects he had administered before his retirement. With his retirement, however, scientists in

78Professional Biography Files, Central History Files, PNW-Portland Office; PNW News, 9 June 1986;

DC Message From Barbara Rosenthal to PNW Staff, 30 May 86 (photocopy of printout in Professional

Biography Files).

79Memo with attached enclosure from Station Director Robert L. Ethington to Forest Service Chief (cc to

C.Bey) on the subject "FY'87 Research Program Plans for the Tongass Timber Supply Fund (TTSFANILCA), 50 March 1985 (photocopy in storage room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA

Forest Service)". Memo with attached enclosure from Station Director Robert L. Ethington to Forest

Service Chief (cc to C.Bey) on the subject "FY'88 Program Plans for Tongass Timber Supply Fund

Research TTSF-ANILCA)", 4 February 1986 (photocopy in storage room, Juneau Forestry Sciences

Laboratory, USDA Forest Service).

186
Alaska lost one of their strongest advocates in the administrative process of allocating funding

and reviewing projects supported with Tongass Fund dollars. As a forest entomologist with considerable experience in forest management, Wright had been instrumental in hiring the third

wave of scientists who had broadened the range of scientific inquiry at Juneau, Fairbanks, and

Anchorage. That broadened perspective contributed to the deeper understanding of ecological

processes that guided researchers who grappled with the far-reaching implications of the ANILCA

mandate for timber sales on the Tongass.

Wright had also nurtured research programs that went beyond the specific missions of the

units at luneau, Fairbanks, or Anchorage. He coordinated, for example, a cooperative agreement

from 1978 to 1988 with Glenn Juday, of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, to resuscitate the

concept of Research Natural Areas in Alaska.80 Wright's support for the reserve concept bore

fruit, ironically, the same year he retired, when Van Cleve and Viereck won administrative approval and a 5-year federal grant to establish a Long-Term Ecological Reserve program at Fairbanks

in a cooperative agreement including scientists at the Fairbanks Lab and the University of Alaska.

Perhaps most indicative of Wright's philosophy of Research in Alaska, and the focus of much of

his volunteer effort after retirement, however, was the establishment of the Copper River Delta

Institute (CRDI) as a fourth research facility in Alaska under the direction of the PNW Station and

Region 10 of the Forest Service.81

Integrated Research and the

Copper River Delta

The Copper River Delta Institute was one of

two institutes established in the first year of

Charles Philpot's term as PNW Station Director

in 1 988, and it was an outgrowth of an ongoing

series of cooperative conferences that began in

the early 1970s under the leadership of Assistant Director Ken Wright and the supervisor of

the Chugach National Forest, Woody Wood row,

with additional support from the University of

Alaska and the Alaska Department of Fish and

Game. Wright recalls he and Woodrow cooperated in the effort to bring together people who

Research on the Copper River Delta in the late 1980s

involved scientists from various agencies and

universities. Here, Vicki Okimuta, Jim Sedell. and Brad

Lovatt set a syke net in the Martin River Slough on the

Copper Rivet Delta in luly 1987 Portland Office

History Files)

80|udav notes that support lor his efforts in the Forest Service evaporated after Wright retired, and he was

evicled from his office at the INF in Fairbanks when Project Leader Richard Werner initiated a house-

(leaning, of sorts, to refocus the mission of the lab in 1988 in view of declining budgets. Interview with

Glen Jnday 18 December 1992.

81Interview with Ken Wright, 13 July 1993; interview with Keith Van Cleve, 18 December 1992;

communication from Ken Wright to Max Geier, 23 September 1994.

187
The diversity of jurisdictions in the Copper River Drainage. These fragmented jurisdictions created administrative hurdles that led Ken Wrig

foward developing an interagency, coordinating office at Cordova in the 1980s. Map derived from K. Margnlis and T. Wolt eds. Prince W

North Cull of Alaska Ecosystem, /Washington, DC. and Cordova AK: Conservation International. Copper River Deita Institute, and Prince 

Center, 1991). p. 13.
The Eyak River ponds and sloughs arc typical of the

wetlands on the Copper River Delia. Scott Glacier

looms in the background. (Portland Office History

riles)

were doing research on the Copper River Delta

in annual and biannual conferences aimed at

facilitating cooperatively funded studies in the

region.82 The Delta is the largest wetland on

the west coast, including Mexico. It spreads out

over 65 miles of coastline, covering 700,000

acres of estuaries, mudflats, marshes, and barrier islands from Orca Inlet to Cape Suckling. It

is an important habitat for the greatest concentration of migratory shorebirds in the world during the spring thaw. Migrating geese, ducks,

swans, and many other waterfowl in numbers

approaching 10 million birds populate the Delta

at peak migration and depend on the Delta as

habitat. The Copper River also is a vital habitat for salmon spawning, and the Copper River

drainage is an important range for deer, bear, moose, and caribou. Cordova is the tenth-largest

fishing port in the United States as measured by catch value, and the Copper River drains an area

rich in timber and mineral resources. Administrative jurisdiction over this vital ecological unit is

divided among the Chugach National Forest, Native Corporations, the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, the Bureau of Land Management, and the State of Alaska, many of

which serve conflicting mandates and various constituencies.83

The diversity of the ecological systems and administrative responsibility on the Copper River

drainage led to a proliferation of studies in the region by scientists affiliated with numerous

private and public agencies, and Wright worked with the supervisor of the Chugach National

Forest, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and several other research cooperators, notably

including Wildlife Ecologist )ohn Thilenius, to bring those people together in a series of conferences beginning in the early 1 970s and continuing through the 1980s. These conferences began

as an annual event, and those involved gradually came to the realization that a more permanent

framework might help draw together the various disciplines and research agendas to arrive at a

more integrative perspective on the ecosystems, resources, and development proposals centered

on the Copper River drainage and delta.

82Fred Stormer recalls that PhiIpot made the establishment of CRDI one of his top priorities in 1988, in

an effort to promote more interdisciplinary research at PNW Station. The establishment of the Blue

Mounains Natural Resources Institute in La Grande was a parallel priority for the station in Oregon.

Interview with Ken Wright and Fred Stormer, 3 July 1997; communication from Ken Wright to Cindy

Miner, 25 June 1997; communication from Fred Stormer, June 1997.

83K. Margolis and T. Wolf, Prince William Sound Copper River North Gulf of Alaska Ecosystem (Portland

Oregon: Conservation International, 1991), 1-15; interview with Ken Wright, 13 July 1993; interview

with Chris Christensen, 13 July 1993.

189
The Ranger District Headquarters in Cordova was the

site of a coordinating effort involving Region 10 and

Research, with the establishment of the Copper River

Delta Institute. The Institute was intended to promote

an integrated ecosystem approach to research efforts,

but it functioned with a skeletal staff and depended on

cooperating scientists with outside funding. (Miner

collection)

The Copper River Delta Institute, jointly funded by

Region 10 and PNW Station in the late 1980s,

functioned as a coordinating agency with a skeletal staff

supporting scientist cooperators from public and private

agencies. Here, Norbert Wissmar examines an

intertidal slough on the Eyak River wetlands at low tide.

(Portland Office History Files)

The Ranger District Headquarters in Cordova provided a logical site for a permanent institute,

and it became the site for coordinating a joint effort of Research and Region. Harriet B. [Chris]

Christensen, whose background included a Ph.D. in recreation from the University of Washington, was hired as the first director of the Copper River Delta Institute, which was jointly funded by

Region 10 and PNW Station. This facility functioned as a coordinating agency to promote an

ecosystem approach to assessing the natural resources of the region and human activities sustainable within that ecosystem.84 In this regard, the Institute was a throwback to the beginnings of

the multifunctional unit at Fairbanks in the early 1960s. In the spirit of the 1980s, however, it

functioned with a skeletal staff, and cooperating scientists from public and private agencies with

outside funding accounted for the bulk of the research accomplished under its auspices. The

express goal of the institute was to build a program that would attract outside support and serve

multiple functions of promoting research, education, and technology transfer. Stormer recalls

this effort as an attempt to address the need to make science relevant and to promote applied

science, and he observes that the intent was to ensure that management goals remained reasonably possible within the broader guidelines of the Forest Service mandate.85

The Copper River Delta Institute was an institutional manifestation of two distinct, and often

contradictory, historical realities in the evolution of Forest Service Research at Juneau, Fairbanks,

and Anchorage; that the Institute became the focus of a joint review process that revisited many

of the issues that Research scientists had faced in Alaska since the years when Taylor first worked

to establish the independent status of the Alaska Forest Research Center is thus not surprising. On

the one hand, Research in Alaska had long struggled to balance the ideal of independent research

84 Interview with Ken Wright, 13 July 1993; interview with Chris Christensen, 13 July 1993.

85 These efforts were part of a broader reorganization that Philpot initiated shortly after his arrival as

PNW Station Director in 1988. Interview with Ken Wright and Fred Stormer, 2 July 1997.

190
with the reality of dependence on the Region for logistical support.86

 On the other hand, scientists had long recognized the need to cultivate cooperative and interdisciplinary networks with

other state and federal agencies and university research programs. The administrative dichotomy

between Forest Research and Forest Management often blurred in the field, where forest managers sought answers to problems and forest researchers found outlets for their creative energy and

scientific curiosity. They worked together in a community of Forest Service professionals far

removed from the center of administrative authority in Washington, DC, but they were also closely

connected with leaders in the scientific community, both in and out of the Forest Service. Those

joint goals found formal expression in the appointment of the Copper River Science Commission,

which assembled in 1991 to evaluate the joint administration of the Institute by the PNW Research Station and Region 10 and to propose a series of action steps and goals for future development of that effort.87

The report of the Copper River Science Commission also reconfirmed the principle that scientific inquiry in the region should include systematic studies of human societies, past and present,

in relation to the Copper River ecosystem. The report is notable for its cogent statement of the

historical pattern of human interaction with the ecosystem, including insights derived from the

experience of Alaska Natives, before European contact, who were often neglected in the formative years of forest-related research in Alaska, beginning with Steller and continuing into the 20th

century. The report's overview and recommended action steps also explicitly recognized the

need for a "human ecology" component of research to study "the interrelationships between

people, the places they value and use, and the processes of which they are a part" (p. 12). It

noted that the Copper River ecosystem afforded an important opportunity to study the relation

between specific environments and human interactions and historical developments, and it argued, "an understanding of the history of the natural and human components of the ecosystem,

and knowledge about the impact of human activities on the ecosystem today, are important to

[the reevaluation of policies and institutions in the region]"(p. 1 5).

The Copper River Science Commission also proposed a re-evaluation of the historical distinction between Research and Management in the Forest Service. It emphasized the need to integrate scientific research with studies of human interaction with the ecosystem in the past and

present. This concept was buttressed with further arguments that management policies should

include the search for knowledge as a primary goal. It called for a formal recognition of the need

for long-term research and monitoring, with support for on-going studies, integration of the results into management policies, and coordination of research with input from local communities,

86Bernard Bormann observes, for example, that scientists in Alaska enjoyed virtually free rein from

Region 10 in locating plots and study sites on National Forest lands, while other Regions often require

compliance with a much more elaborate clearance process before initiating studies, laying in plots, or

digging soil pits.

87Copper River Science Commision, "Report of the Copper River Science Commission submitted to: Dr.

Charles PhiIpot, Director, PNW Research Station [and] Mr. Michael Barton, Regional Forester, R10,"

(typescript manuscript provided by Bernard Bormann, dated 1991)

191
The Report of the Copper River Science

Commission (1991) explicitly recognized the need

lor a "human ecology" component at research to

study "interrelationships between people, the

places they value and use, and the processes of

which they are a part. " (Schmiege collection)

The Copper River

Science

Commission report

(1991) called for

formal recognition

of the need for

long-term research

and monitoring,

with support for

on-going studies.

Here, Brad Lovatt,

Jim Hawkins, and

Brenda Wright

weigh and measure

salmonids

captured on the

Eyak River.

(Portland Office

History Files)

and formal evaluation of the impact that research has on management policies. Action steps

proposed in the report included the creation of a technical committee to provide advice on

management decisions affecting research, with members representing local, national, and international interests and a "wide mix of disciplines." (pp. 24-26)

The ideas expressed in the Copper River Science Commission report hinted at a new paradigm for Forest Service Research in its relations with Regional Foresters in Alaska that, nonetheless, built on themes deeply rooted in the era of Heintzleman and Taylor. Heintzleman had

strongly supported and subsidized Research in Alaska, and that kind of support remained central

to the success of the Alaska Forest Research Center and later incarnations of the Research Branch

in Alaska into the 1 990s. Taylor had struggled to assert the independent status of his unit; however, he, like later administrators of Research in Alaska, struggled with problems of scale and

difficult access that strained the limits of available resources. The upshot of that struggle, which

continued through 1990, was a community culture of scientists who asserted their independence

from Region 10 even as the Regional Forester facilitated the annual allocation of Tongass Timber

Supply Funds to Research and served on oversight committees governing the disposition of those

funds. The continuing reality of their interdependence aggravated other tensions between Research and Region, and, together with difficulties in securing sufficient internal, external, and

Congressional support,88 effectively limited the viability of the jointly administered Copper River

Delta. The Copper River Science Commission's proposed action steps represented a self-conscious effort to formalize the integration of Forest Research priorities and agendas with Forest

Management goals and mandates in a document developed with input from representatives of

88Fred Stormer cites three major factors behind the failure of the CRDI to flourish after its initial

establishment: "diversion of management energy and dollars; a failure to engender sufficient internal,

external, and congressional support; and competition and overlapping roles with the Prince William

Sound Science Center." Interview with Ken Wright and Fred Stormer, 2 July 1997.

192
Region 10, the PNW Station, the broader scientific community, and local, state, national, and

international interest groups. In this sense, it was an effort to continue the interdependence

between Region and Research, but in a more structured and balanced way than previously. In

another sense, it documents the continuing evolution of Forest Service priorities and the reintegration of human knowledge about forest ecosystems in an effort to better understand the

disparate parts making up the whole.

193
Conclusion: Legacies and Evolving Priorities in

Alaska Forest Research, 1741-1990

The reliance on grantsmanship and cooperative arrangements with scientists outside the Forest Service had transformed traditions of Research among the community of scientists with the

Forest Service in Alaska by the end of the 1980s. The quest for usable knowledge about forest

resources had clearly entered a new era by the end of the decade, but in many ways the situation

in 1 990 bore a remarkable resemblance to the time when naturalist Georg Steller was forced to

sign on as ship's surgeon to gain passage with Vitus Bering to North America nearly 250 years

earlier. As noted at the outset of this history, Steller was forced to set aside his primary research

interests and assume what he considered the more mundane responsibilities of a ship's surgeon,

to cover the high overhead costs (for travel and logistics) of doing research in Alaska. By his own

account, Steller endured months of ridicule at the hands of Bering and his crew, and despite his

enthusiasm about being on the expedition, he became increasingly agitated as numerous opportunities for research passed him by while he pursued his duties on board the ship, before he

finally was allowed to unleash his professional curiosity for a scant 1 0 hours of scientific discovery on Kayak Island in Prince William Sound. In a later period, and under different circumstances, scientists experienced similar spasms of conflicting emotions: enthusiasm and excitement at the potential for scientific discovery, and frustration with necessary limits constraining

the release of their professional curiosity.

Scientists with the Forest Service in Alaska, until 1 990, often found themselves at the center of

vocal public debates about the consequences of the agency's long-term management of Alaska

forests, and they frequently found themselves engaged in relatively mundane efforts to gather

information requested by the various parties to those debates. They sometimes chafed at the

situation in which they found themselves: many had enthusiastically sought and secured PNW

Station appointments in Alaska, often in pursuit of long-term research interests, but they also

frequently chafed under the realization that limitless opportunities for potential research in the

vast forests of Alaska were just beyond their reach, given the differential between available funding, and the exorbitant costs of travel and logistical support for research in Alaska forests. The

more innovative of these scientists competed for funding by adapting their research to attract

support from alternative funding sources and cooperating agencies. In southeast Alaska, scientists had access to research allocations from the Tongass Timber Supply Fund, provided their

research proposals addressed the Congressional mandates governing distribution of those funds.

In the post-ANILCA world of the 1980s, consequently, research efforts in southeast Alaska entered an expansive new era. Scientists in the interior, by contrast, generally lacked access to

these funds, unless they were able to redirect their research into avenues more directly relevant to

the forests of southeast Alaska. In this sense, they remained relatively vulnerable to the shifting

moods of public priorities and governing mandates for Alaska.

194
As scientists in Alaska struggled to pursue their professional interests and goals, they also

worked within the corporate culture of the Forest Service, which was deeply rooted in the hierarchical traditions of the progressive era, and tended to reward individual effort and focused specialization. The system of budget-line allocations sometimes imposed a structural hurdle for

scientists and PNW administrators seeking to build long-term, interdisciplinary programs of research, particularly when coupled with the chronic differential between the high overhead cost

of doing research in Alaska and the available funding from PNW Station, and the competing need

to fund research elsewhere in the station. These hurdles were not impassable, and scientists and

PNW Station administrators engineered often remarkable advances in the area of multidisciplinary

research at Fairbanks and )uneau, especially during and after the 1970s. The obstacles sometimes were enough to frustrate talented scientists and channel their energies into paths other than

those their curiosity might have chosen in the quest for knowledge about how forest ecosystems

operate and why. Nevertheless, scientists and administrators with PNW Station pioneered programs of research in Alaska that opened new opportunities for a productive interface between

science and policy and between Research and Management in the region's forests, which have

been the focus of scientific inquiry and discovery for more than 200 years.

195
Epilogue

When we were asked to write an epilogue to this history, we began by looking up the definition

in the American Heritage Dictionary. An epilogue, the dictionary says, is

A short addition or concluding section at the end of (a) literary work, often

dealing with the future of its characters.

The "characters" for which we here provide a future are the PNW researchers in Alaska from

about 1990, when Max Geier ended his history, to the present. The situation in Alaska has

changed in ways far beyond the scope of an epilogue. Here, we present a brief description of the

most important events since 1990.

First, we would like to reflect on the book's contents. The book is an analysis of Alaska forest

research history by Max Geier, a professional historian contracted from a nearby university. One

benefit of having someone from outside the Forest Service write the history is that the writer can

stand back and observe the organization somewhat more objectively than an insider might. We

asked the author to base this history on interviews with the PNW scientists who lived it. Sometimes what Geier describes is reassuring. Sometimes it is not; we may even disagree with some of

his observations. Regardless, this history allows readers to reflect on the present and future of the

PNW Station from a perspective well grounded in the past.

The 1 990s have accelerated the trends described here for the 1980s: high-profile issues about

natural resources in Alaska accompanied by increased budget constraints. The Station went

through a major reorganization and developed a long-term strategic plan under the leadership of

Charles Philpot, Station Director from 1988 to 1995. Philpot foresaw federal budget trends and

helped the Station anticipate them. One of his strongest efforts was designed to improve integration of research by reorganizing the structure of the Station. The reorganization created programs

that shifted the focus of the organizational framework from geography to subject areas. Thomas

Mills became Station Director in 1995, just when the effects of major reductions were being felt

throughout the federal government. Forest Service Research took a 10 percent cut in 1996. In

March of that year, the Station closed the Fairbanks lab. Although the Fairbanks laboratory is no

longer open and the research budget has been cut substantially, the Institute of Northern Forestry

continues as a cooperative effort between the Station and the University of Alaska in Fairbanks.

The most pressing work in Alaska for the Station in the 1 990s has been to contribute scientific

information as a basis for revising the Tongass Land Management Plan. A team of scientists led by

Fred Everest worked with resource managers from the National Forest system in 1994 to assess

the Tongass National Forest, in keeping with the trend to conduct such assessments over large

areas to provide input into major planning efforts. The science team examined information from

the literature; conducted specific assessments, workshops, and resource analyses; and consulted

with various expert panels to help in evaluating the consequences of alternative decisions. Current Station Director Thomas Mills has played a significant role in defining how science fits into

197
the Tongass Land Management Plan. He expects Station scientists to freely provide information

from their research, describing the degree of certainty it provides, but without advocating courses

of action.

After an assessment and agreement between the Station and the Forest Service Washington

Office, the PNW Station deemphasized research in several areas, including boreal forest ecosystems—a main thrust of the research at Fairbanks. At the time of the decision to close Fairbanks,

the following areas were the primary focus of research:

Forest insects, including dispersal behavior of bark beetles, pheromone studies

on population dynamics of the spruce beetle and other Alaska bark beetles, and

host-insect interactions and related resistance of trees to those insects.

Boreal forest regeneration, from both basic and applied perspectives, especially

regenerating harvest sites. Studies included population ecology of mixed species

plantations, competition studies, and trials of alternatives to herbicides for

managing vegetation.

Ecosystem processes in the boreal forest of Alaska to help in managing them or

for predicting and mitigating changes caused by such factors as altered global

climate. Long-term studies included ecosystem processes that control primary

succession; forest development on river flood plains; and long-term monitoring

of forest ecosystem health and condition in the Bonanza Creek Experimental

Forest and the Caribou-Poker Creeks Research Watershed.

At its closing, the Fairbanks laboratory had seven permanent full-time scientists; some of them

retired, others found new positions in the Federal government or elsewhere, or they resigned.

Two new positions were created to continue the Institute of Northern Forestry with focus on the

Long-Term Ecological Reserve project. One of these positions is a half-time appointment filled

by Tricia Wurtz in summer 1996. The laboratory building, which is Station property (the land is

under long-term lease from the University), is being offered to other Federal agencies. If none

choose to occupy it, it will become the property of the University.

Closure of the Fairbanks laboratory brings to an end most of the Station's outstanding basic

and applied research on boreal forests over the past 40 years. Cooperative research with the

University of Alaska will continue, but the scope of the Station's program at Fairbanks is much

reduced.

The Copper River Delta Institute has suffered a fate similar to that of the Fairbanks laboratory.

Station scientists continue programs of research in the Copper River Delta, but the Institute has

been closed.

The Anchorage Forestry Sciences Laboratory continues to serve as the single source for scientifically designed, ground-based, statewide inventory information on Alaska forest lands, under

team leader Fred Larson. Kathy Geyer became acting Program Manager after Jim LaBau retired in

1991. Although forest health and protection research was discontinued in Fairbanks, two shared

positions with Region 10 remain in Anchorage (Paul Hennon and Ed Holsten), where current

198
studies include spruce beetle population interactions with fire. Vic Van Ballenberghe continues

to study moose population dynamics with one of the longest studies of record on the subject.

The Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory has teams from two Stationwide programs: Aquatic

and Land Interactions and Resource Management and Productivity. In the first, the Juneau team

is responding to three fish-riparian themes: ocean to main stream and uplands, flood plain and

stream interactions, and hydrologic and geomorphic processes affecting aquatic and riparian

systems. The team has recently been reorganized into several groups led by Tom Hanley, Fred

Everest, Richard Woodsmith, and Mason Bryant.

The Resource Management and Productivity Research Program in Juneau is currently conducting three studies. One is on how a wind-dominated disturbance regime and widespread

wetlands in southeast Alaska affect the productivity, structure, and functions of forest; the study is

focused on management implications and designing silvicultural systems. The second study is on

the biological, physical, and socioeconomic effects of silvicultural alternatives to clearcutting in

southeast Alaska. The third is on growth and yield of young, even-aged stands on public and

private lands in Alaska.

As this history shows, forestry research ebbs and flows, and has many dimensions in Alaska.

What is in the future? Budget constraints will continue, although the 1997 budget is not expected

to have cuts at the same scale as in 1996. Station priorities for the next 3 to 5 years will focus

mostly on southeast Alaska, with some activities in the interior. The Station will continue to work

with the Alaska Region in studies related to the Tongass Land Management Plan.

We have the pleasure of knowing first-hand the dedication and tenacity of PNW Station

employees in producing scientific information important to decisions about natural resources in

Alaska. We look forward to the continuation of this tradition by current and future generations of

Station scientists in Alaska.

Ken Wright

Cindy Miner

January 1997

199
Appendix A

Timeline of Administrative and Science Leadership in

Alaska Forest and Related Research, 1741 to 1990

Kenneth H. Wright

1741 Georg W. Steller, a member of Vitus Bering's Russian expedition, visited

the Alaska coastline and was allowed a 10-hour tour ashore on Kayak Island

to collect plants and make observations. Steller's journal entries are regarded

as the first scientific observation of birds in Alaska.

1741-1800 Journals were written from about 90 expeditions from Soviet ports to assess fur availability, but information on flora, fauna, and Native peoples was

also recorded. The voyage of Englishman James Cook in 1 778 along the Alaska

coast also resulted in important scientific information. Gregori Shelikov established trading posts on Kodiak Island, Afognak Island, and Kenai Peninsula

by 1 786. He proposed in 1 790 that a tree-growing site be designated at each

settlement in Russian America, like the one established atThree Saints Bay on

Kodiak Island in 1784. Shelikov's successor, Aleksandr Baranov, moved operations in 1 791 to the northern portion of Kodiak Island for easier access to

forest resources for fuel wood and ship building.

Nikkolai Rizanov took over in 1 795 and proceeded to reorganize the Alaska

fur enterprise as the Russian-American Company; in addition to dealing in

furs, the company conveyed rights of access and control over forest reserves

in Alaska.

George Vancouver, who had served on Cook's 1778 voyage, conducted

his own expedition in 1794 and published his journals from it in 1798. The

expedition included Archibald Menzies as ship's surgeon and naturalist.

Menzies collected seeds and cuttings that eventually were planted in England

as specimen trees, thus bringing Alaska species into the limelight of forest

research in Europe.

1800-67 Rizanov's concern about Vancouver's expedition and other foreign interests in Alaska yielded a bonus for later forest researchers. Rizanov met with

Baronov in 1805; they decided to establish plantations on Amakrack Island in

Unalaska Bay to make the area more appealing to human occupants. Sitka

spruce were transplanted from Sitka to Unalaska between 1807 and 1813,

and several plantations were established over the next half century.

200
Frederic Litke commanded an expedition with naturalist Dr. Merkens from

1826-29 and returned to Russia with 2,500 plants and more than 1,500 animal specimens. The collection of specimens was made available to European

scientists; Litke published his journal in 1835.

Loventry Zagoskin led the first scientific expedition into the Yukon and

Kuskokwim drainages in 1842-43. His published journals include detailed

descriptions of boreal forest ecology in the Yukon drainage as far inland as the

mouth of the Tanana River.

Western Union Telegraph Company commissioned a survey in 1863 for

an overland telegraph line from the Western United States through British

Columbia and Russian America to the Bering Straits, to link up with the transSiberian line. Robert Kennicott headed the survey for Western Union and

assembled specialists in plants, insects, birds, small mammals, invertebrates,

and fishes. The Smithsonian Institution and Chicago Academy of Sciences

funded much of the work from 1865-67 and produced many publications.

1867-1900 The military culture of the United States Army, which occupied Alaska

after its purchase in 1867, differed in many ways from that of the Russian

Navy. Army officials were rewarded for skills not necessarily scientific in

nature. Some of their Russian predecessors had requested Alaska assignments

because of their scientific interests and training. The initial result, in 1867,

was weak support for government-sponsored research programs.

The Western Union project of 1863-67 floundered, and its Director,

Robert Kennicott died in 1866. His successor, fish specialist William DalI,

suffered when his funding was abruptly terminated in 1867, although he did

collect more than 4,500 specimens in the Yukon drainage. His book, Alaska

and Its Resources, was published in 1870; it encouraged further scientific

expeditions in the interior of Alaska.

American government support for research in Alaska forests before the

Division of Forestry was established in the Department of Agriculture largely

centered on the efforts of Ivan Petroff, a native of Russia and a veteran of the

Union Army, who compiled a special report on Alaska for theTenth Census of

the United States in 1880. Petroff's census reports were influential in shaping

American perceptions of Alaska's forests.

John Muir toured southeastern Alaska in 1879 and emphasized its potential for scientific research and tourism. The American Forestry Association, in

the 1870s urged the national government to promote timber cultivation and

20 1
preservation. Bernard Fernow, a member of the American Forestry Association, became head of the Division of Forestry of the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 1886. In his first year in office, he outlined a plan of forest research.

He lobbied hard for Congressional legislation to set aside federal forest lands.

He was successful in 1891, when Congress passed a Forest Reserve Act. In

the next year, President Harrison established the Afognak Forest and Fish Culture Reserve. The E.H. Harriman expedition to Alaska in 1989 recruited more

than 20 scientists, including Fernow, to tour the Alaska coast. The expedition

included specialists in botany, paleontology, mining, mineralogy, geology,

zoology, entomology, mammalogy, ornithology, biology, anatomy, forestry,

and geography, and many scholarly papers were published from 1 902 to 1 91 4.

1900-24 The Bureau of Forestry became the U.S. Forest Service in 1905, under

Cifford Pinchot, but research in Alaska was not a priority.

Henry Graves replaced Pinchot in 1915, visited Alaska, and named Earl

Clapp as head of the Branch of Research, in Washington, DC. Forest Service

research in Alaska focused on needs of Forest Supervisors on the Chugach

and Tongass National Forests, and related to forest management. Graves and

Thornton Munger visited Alaska. The small amount of research done was

under the supervision of the Regional Forester.

1924-48 The Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station was established in 1924 under Thornton Munger. Alaska Research was transferred to

the PNW Station; however, logistic and financial support continued to depend heavily on Alaska forest managers until the late 1920s.

PNW Station Director Munger toured Alaska in 1924, accompanied by

Ray Taylor, who had conducted growth and yield research in southeastern

Alaska since 1 924. Munger recommended expanded research in Alaska, particularly on growth, yield, and regeneration in spruce-hemlock forests. The

McSweeney-McNary Act, passed in 1925, put Research on a par with other

Forest Service activities, and formalized the basic framework for the regional

forest experiment stations in the United States.

Ray Taylor, Harold Lutz, and James Walley conducted research from the

mid to late 1 920s, funded mainly by Regional Forester Frank Heintzleman, on

growth, yield, and forest inventory. Taylor continued seasonal research in

Alaska until 1939 while doing graduate work at Yale. He then transferred to

the Washington, DC, Office of the Forest Service, and then to the Rocky Mountain Station in 1935. Lutz published research on glacial moraines in 1930.

202
Robert Criggs published several articles on forest soils and ecology in 1933

and 1934. L.J. Markwardt published in 1931 on the mechanical properties of

Alaska woods and made estimates of Alaska timber volumes. Research by L.J.

Palmer on wildlife and rangelands in Alaska resulted in publications in 1926

and 1933. Frank DuFresne reported on Alaska animals and fishes in 1946.

David Bruce conducted tree-planting research in the Aleutians in the early

1940s and has continued his interest and involvement to the present.

1948-59 Ray Taylor returned to )uneau in 1948 and established the Alaska Forest

Research Center at Juneau—with some research programs at Fairbanks. The

Center operated independently, reporting directly to the Forest Service's Washington Office. It grew from a two-person operation in 1948 to a staff of 14 by

1959, when Taylor retired. Key researchers in addition to Taylor were Richard

Godman, Lawrence Zach, Harold Anderson, John Hall, William McCambridge,

George Downing, A. P. Caparoso, Al Harris, Bill Farr, Robert Gregory, Austin

Helmers, Keith Hutchison, Karl Hegg, Tom Laurent, Paul Haack, and Richard

Werner. Important areas of research during the period included silviculture,

mensuration, fisheries habitat, water quality, soil movement, entomology, and

forest survey.

Taylor prepared excellent Progress Reports on the research at both Juneau

and Fairbanks. Several publications were also produced.

1959-61 Leadership of the Alaska Forest Research Center was transferred to Austin

Helmers, who also administered from Juneau a small staff at Fairbanks in rented

facilities near the University of Alaska. Scientists on site at Fairbanks were

Bob Gregory (silviculture) and Von Johnson (fire ecology). Working out of

Juneau, Forest Inventory work included surveys in interior Alaska beginning

in 1956 under Caparoso.

Taylor and colleagues at Region 10 lobbied the Washington Office to

broaden the designation of the Center from a research facility to a full-fledged

Experiment Station. Their effort was successful, and the Northern Station became a reality July 1, 1961, with headquarters at Juneau under Director Richard Hurd.

Staffing at Juneau and Fairbanks remained much the same at both locations as in 1 959, but with Bob Gregory serving as project leader at Fairbanks.

1961-66 Richard Hurd served as Station Director and reported to the Deputy for

Research in Washington. Research at Juneau was concentrated on forest management (Al Harris and Bill Farr), wildlife and fish habitat (Bill Meehan), forest

203
soil and water (Doug Swanston and Austin Helmers), insect and disease research (Don Schmiege, John Hard, and Tom Laurent), forest survey (Keith

Hutchison, Jim LaBau, Paul Haack, Karl Hegg, David Born, Bob Mattson, and

Jim Bones). Research at Fairbanks was expanded with studies on white spruce,

silviculture (Bob Gregory, Les Viereck, Joan Foote), fire ecology (Von Johnson,

Dick Barney), entomology (Roy Beckwith), and water ecology (Austin Helmers).

At Fairbanks, a new forestry sciences laboratory was built on the University of Alaska campus (1961-63), and the Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest

(in cooperation with the State) was dedicated in 1963. Much of the research

at Fairbanks was cooperative studies with University of Alaska scientists.

1966-71 As a result of a Washington Office inspection, the administration of Forest

Service research in Alaska was transferred back in 1966 to the Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, then directed by Philip A. Briegleb.

Briegleb organized the Alaska research by subject matter under four Assistant

Directors (ADs) who also had responsibilities in Oregon and Washington:

Timber Management

AD David Tackle

Juneau

Al Harris

Bill Farr

—

—

Fairbanks

Les Viereck

Joan Foote

John Zasada

Bob Gregory

Forest Environment

AD Robert Harris (1966-70)

AD Robert Tarrant (1 970-74)

Juneau

A. Helmers

Bill Meehan

D. Swanston

—

Fairbanks

A. Helmers

(1971)

—

—

—

Forest Protection

AD Kenneth Wright

Juneau

Don

Schmiege

John Hard

T. Torgerson

—

Fairbanks

D. Barney

N. Noste

R. Beckwith

—

Economics, Inventory

Engineering Products

AD Donald Flora

Juneau

K.

Hutchinson

J. La Bau

Karl Hegg

R. Dippold

Fairbanks

—

—

—

—

Richard Hurd retired from the Forest Service in 1970, as did Director Phil Briegleb of PNW Station.

1971-75 Robert Buckman became director of the PNW Station in 1971, and Ken

Wright assumed responsibility for Alaska research, except for Forest Inventory

which remained under Don Flora and soil, water, and fisheries research which

continued under Bob Tarrant.

In 1971, all research at Fairbanks was combined under a multifunctional

research unit titled "Ecology and Management of the Taiga" (subarctic forests)—Interior Alaska; Charles T. Cushwa was recruited as leader and served

from 1971-74. Ted Dyrness assumed control of the Fairbanks unit in 1974,

and stayed for 1 6 years.

Recreation research was begun in southeast Alaska, but it was conducted

as extensions from the PNW recreation research unit in Seattle, as were forest

204
products recovery and timber quality studies from a PNW unit in Portland.

The Caribou-Poker Creeks Experimental Watershed was established in the

Fairbanks research program, with Austin Helmers as leader. The U.S. Army

contributed facilities and equipment. Helmers retired in 1976, and was replaced by Chuck Slaughter.

Beckwith transferred from Fairbanks to Corvallis in 1 974, and was replaced

in forest insect research by Skeeter Werner.

The multifunctional research unit concept was also instituted at Juneau, in

a program titled "Ecology of southeastern Alaska forests," headed by Don

Schmiege.

K Victor Koske and Arthur Bloom, fisheries biologists, were added to the

multifunctional unit at Juneau in 1973.

Assistant Director Ken Wright was detailed to the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, (but remained in Portland) to lead the westwide research

and development program on the Douglas-fir tussock moth from 1 974 to 1 977.

During his absence, Jack Grantham, a project leader in forest products research, was detailed to replace him.

1975-80 PNW Director Buckman transferred in 1975 to Washington, DC, to become Deputy Chief of Forest Service Research.

The Forest Inventory unit was transferred in 1 978 from Juneau to Anchorage; unit leader Keith Hutchison retired in December 1979, after recruiting

scientists Ted Setzer, Bert Mead, Gary Carroll, Fred Larson, and Ken

Winterberger. Already on board was Jim LaBau, who was assigned the project

leader position.

The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), passed in

1980, was an outgrowth of the final report of the Joint Federal-State Land Use

Planning Commission for Alaska in 1 979. As finally drafted, the Act radically

revised public land holdings in many parts of Alaska, placing 104 million

acres in new conservation units; it established boundaries for Native, private,

federal, and state lands.

1981 -1990 Because of strong support from Region 10 Regional Forester John Sandor,

PNW Station research in Alaska gained access to substantial annual funding

from provisions of the Act for S.E. Alaska projects. This support came to be

known as Tongass Timber Supply Funds (TTSF). Primarily from the Tongass

Timber Supply funding, research staffing at Juneau underwent significant reorganization, leadership, and staffing. Directors of the Multiproject Research

205
Program were Calvin Bey, 1983-86, and John Henley, 1986-90. Serving on

the advisory committee were Deputy Regional Forester John Sandor, Assistant

Director Ken Wright, and Assistant Director Don Flora.

Advisory Committee:

R-10 Deputy Regional Forester

Assistant Director Ken Wright

Assistant Director Don Flora

MULTIPROJECT RESEARCH PROGRAM

Director Calvin Bey 1983-86

Director John Henley 1986-90

Timber Management

Al Harris

Bill Farr

Bernard Bormann

Fish habitat

Bill Meehan

Mason Bryant

Pam Porter

Dick Orchard

Jim Sedell*

Soil and water

Doug Swanston

Roy Sidle

Wildlife habitat

Tom Hanley

John Thilenius

Vic Van

Ballenberghe

Paul Alaback

Economics

Don Flora*

Roger Fight*

Richard Haynes*

Improved utilization

Dick Woodfin*

Marlin Plank*

Frank Ward*

Tom Fahey*

Jim Howard*

*Working at PNW locations other than Juneau.

Research biologist Vic Van Ballenberghe joined the staff at Fairbanks and

began highly productive research in wildlife biology (mainly on moose and

wolf). He moved to the Anchorage Laboratory in 1984. In 1984, Skeeter

Werner replaced Ted Dyrness as project leader at Fairbanks. John Hard, entomologist, returned to Fairbanks in 1985 after assignments in California and

Missoula; he then transferred to the Region 10 office in Anchorage. During

the 1980s, Region 10 assumed responsibility for forest inventories of National

Forest lands.

George Sampson joined the Fairbanks Lab in the early 1980s to study the

potential for developing a forest products industry for interior Alaska.

The Fairbanks Laboratory was faced with closure in fiscal year 1987, for

lack of appropriated funds. Congress restored funding; but the lab was closed

in 1995.

In 1987, Les Viereck, in cooperation with University of Alaska, won administrative approval and a 5-year federal grant to establish a Long-Term Ecological Reserve Research Program at Fairbanks.

The Copper River Delta Institute was formally established at Cordova in

the late 1980s, after annual meetings of many cooperating federal and state

agencies, beginning in 1971. Chris Christensen was appointed as the first

director. The undertaking was funded jointly by Region 10 and the PNW

Station. The Delta is the largest wetland on the west coast of North America,

covering 700,000 acres of estuaries, mudflats, marshes, and barrier islands.

206
Appendix B

Suggested Readings

Alaback, Paul B. 1984. Secondary succession following logging in the Sitka spruce-western

hemlock forests of southeast Alaska: implications for wildlife management. Portland, OR:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station, General Technical Report PNW-173.

Alden, J.N.; Bruce, D. 1989. Growth of historical Sitka spruce plantations at Unalaska Bay,

Alaska. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-236.

Alden, John; Mastrantonio, J. Louise; and Odum, Soren, eds. 1993. Forest development in

cold climates. NATO ASI Series A, Life Sciences, v. 244. NATO Advanced Research

Workshop on Forest Development in Cold Climates; 1991; Lauarvaten, Iceland. North

Atlantic Treaty Organization Scientific Affairs Division. New York: Plenum Press.

Beckwith, Roy C. 1992. Scolytid flight in white spruce stands in Alaska. Canadian

Entomologist 104: 1977-1983.

Bell, John F.; Atterbury, Toby. 1993. eds. Renewable resource inventories for monitoring

changes and trends. Proceedings of an international conference, August 15-19, 1983,

Corvallis, OR. Corvallis: Oregon State University.

Berry, Philip; McCloskey, Michael. 1970. The Public Land Law Review Commission Report:

An analysis. Sierra Club Bulletin 55, October.

Bloom, Arthur M. 1978. Sitka black-tailed deer winter range in the Kadashan Bay area,

southeast Alaska, lournal of Wildlife Management 42: 55-56.

Bormann, Bernard T.; Brookes, Martha H.; Ford, E. David; [and others]. 1994. Eastside forest

ecosystem health assessment, Volume V: A framework for sustainable-ecosystem

management. Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-331.

Bormann, B.T.; Spaltenstein, H.; McClellan, M.H.; [and others]. 1995. Rapid soil

development after windthrow disturbance in pristine forests, lournal of Ecology 83: 747-

757.

Bowler, Peter J. 1993. The Norton history of the environmental sciences. New York: WW

Norton & Co.

Brooks, Alfred Hulse. 1967. History of explorations and surveys. In Morgan B. Sherwood, ed.

Alaska and its history. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Clark, Roger N.; Lucas, Robert C. 1978. The forest ecosystem of southeast Alaska. X.

Outdoor recreation and scenic resources. Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, PNW-66.

Cowlin, Robert (n.d.). Federal forest research in the Pacific Northwest: The Pacific Northwest

Forest and Range Experiment Station. Unpublished typescript, in the Portland Office

History Files.

Cronon, William. 1983. Changes in the land: Indians, colonists, and the ecology of New

England. New York: Hill and Wang.

207
Dall, William Healy. 1870. Alaska and its resources. Boston: Lee and Shepard.

Dana, Samuel Trask; Fairfax, Sally K. 1980. Forest and range policy: its development in the

United States. 2d edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Dyrness, C.J.; Norum, Rodney A. 1983. The effects of experimental fires on black spruce

forest floors in interior Alaska. Canadian lournal of Forest Research 13: 879-893.

Faber, Daniel; O'Connor, James. 1989. The struggle for nature: Environmental crises and the

crisis of environmentalism in the United States. Capitalism, Nature, Socialism 2: 12-37.

Farr, Wilbur A. 1967. Growth and yield of well-stocked white spruce stands in Alaska.

Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and

Range Experiment Station, PNW-53.

Fisher, Robin. 1977. Contact and conflict: Indian-European relations in British Columbia,

1 774-1890. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

Fortuine, Robert. 1992. Chills and fever: Health and disease in the early history of Alaska.

Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press.

Frome, Michael. 1984. The Forest Service. 2d ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Frost, O.W., ed. 1992. Bering and Chirikov: The American voyages and their impact.

Anchorage: Alaska Historical Society.

Griggs, R.F. 1933. The colonization of the Katmai ash, a new and inorganic 'soil'. American

lournal of Botany 20: 92-113.

Griggs, R.F. 1934. Edge of the forest in Alaska and the reasons for its position. Ecology 15: 80-96.

Hanley, Thomas A.; Robbins, Charles T.; Spalinger, Donald E. 1989. Forest habitats and the

nutritional ecology of Sitka black-tailed deer: A research synthesis with implications for

forest management. Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, PNW-GTR-230.

Harris, A.S. 1957. The quick cruise circular slide rule. Juneau: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Alaska Forest Research Center, Technical Note 37.

Harris, A.S. 1967. Natural reforestation on a mile-square clearcut in southeast Alaska.

Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and

Range Experiment Station, PNW-52.

Harrison, Robert Pogue. 1992. Forests: The shadow of civilization. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.

Hegg, Karl. 1966. A photo identification guide for the land and forest types of interior Alaska.

Juneau: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Forest Experiment Station,

NOR-3.

Heintzleman, B.F. 1936. Alaska. In U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. The

Western Range—a great but neglected natural resource. U.S Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Senate Document 199—Separate 17.

Helmers, A.E. 1973. Alaska forestry—a research frontier, Journal of Forestry 58(6): 465-71.

Hirt, Paul W. 1994. A conspiracy of optimism: Management of the National Forests since

World War Two. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Hutchison, O. Keith. 1967. Alaska's forest resource. Juneau: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Institute of Northern

Forestry, U.S. Forest Service Resource Bulletin PNW 19.

205
James, James Alton. 1942. The first scientific exploration of Russian America and the purchase

of Alaska. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.

Lutz, H.J. 1963. Early forest conditions in the Alaska interior: an historical account with

original sources. Juneau: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Forest

Experiment Station.

Lutz, H.J. 1956. Ecological etfects of forest fires in the interior of Alaska. Washington, DC:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin 1133.

Lutz, Harold. 1963. History of Sitka spruce planted in 1805 at Unalaska Island by the

Russians. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Forest and Range Experiment Station, Northern Forest Experiment Station.

Margolis, K., and Wolf, T. 1991. Prince William Sound Copper River North Gulf of Alaska

ecosystem. Portland, OR: Conservation International.

McEvoy, Arthur F. 1986. The fisherman's problem: Ecology and law in the California fisheries,

1 850-1 980. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Meehan, William R. 1974. The forest ecosystem of southeast Alaska. III. Fish habitats.

Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and

Range Experiment Station, PNW-15.

Meehan, William R.; Farr, W.A.; Bishop, D.M.; Patric, J.H. 1969. Some effects of clearcutting on

salmon habitat of two southeast Alaska salmon streams. Portland: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, PNW-82.

Meehan, William R.; Merrell, Theodore R., Jr.; Hanley, Thomas A., eds. 1984. Fish and

wildlife relationships in old-growth forests. Proceedings of a symposium, 1982 April 12-

15. Juneau, AK: American Institute of Fishery Research Biologists.

Meehan, William R.; Norris, Logan A.; Sears, Howard S. 1974. Toxicity of various

formulations of 2,4-D to salmonids in southeast Alaska, journal of the Fish Resources

Board_of_anada 31 : 480-485.

Merriam, C. Hart. 1902. Harriman Alaska Expedition. Volume two. New York: Doubleday,

Page, and Company, and Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

Muir, John. 1915. Travels in Alaska. Boston: Houghlin-Mifflin.

Munger, Thornton T. 1924. Governmental forest research: A paper concerning the work of the

Pacific Northwest Forest Experiment Station for the Annual Meeting of the Western Forestry

and Conservation Association, Vancouver, BC, December 3, 1924. Typescript, in the

storage room, juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service.

Munger, Thornton T. 1924. The objectives of the new Federal Forest Experiment Station:

Address read at Pacific Logging Congress, Portland, Oregon, October 22, 1924. Typescript,

in the storage room, Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory, USDA Forest Service.

Munger, Thornton T. 1962. Recollections of my thirty-eight years in the Forest Service, 1908-

1946. Timberlines: Thirty-Year Club, Region Six, U.S. Forest Service. Supplement to Vol. 16.

Murray, John A., ed. 1990. A republic of rivers: Three centuries of nature writing from Alaska

and the Yukon. New York: Oxford University Press.

Naske, Claus-M., Slotnick, Herman E. 1987. Alaska: A history of the 49th state. 2d ed.

Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

Olson, Wallace M.;Thilenius, John F. 1993. The travel journal of Archibald Menzies, 1793-

1794. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press.

209
Public Land Law Review Commission. 1970. One third of the Nation's land. Washington,

DC: Government Printing Office.

Pyne, Stephen J. 1982. Fire in America: A cultural history of wildland and rural fire.

Princeton, Nj: Princeton University Press.

Rakestraw, Lawrence. 1981. A history of the United States Forest Service in Alaska.

Anchorage: Alaska Historical Commission, Department of Education, State of Alaska, and

the Alaska Region, Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture.

Ray, Dorothy Jean. 1992. The Eskimos of Bering Strait. 1650-1898. Seattle: University of

Washington Press.

Robbins, Roy M. 1976. Our landed heritage: The public domain, 1776-1970. Lincoln:

University of Nebraska Press.

Robbins, William G. 1985. American forestry: A history of national, state, and private

cooperation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Sherwood, Morgan B. 1965. Exploration of Alaska, 1865-1900. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Slaughter, Charles W. 1971. Caribou-Poker Creeks Research Watershed, Interior Alaska:

Background and current status. Hanover, NH: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions

Research and Engineering Laboratory, Special Report 157.

Southeast Alaska Conservation Council. 1984. TheTongass timber problem: What you can do

about it. Juneau, AK: Tongass Accountability Project.

Steen, Harold K. 1976. The U.S. Forest Service: A history. Seattle: University of Washington

Press.

Stejeneger, Leonhard. 1936. Georg Wilhelm Steller: The pioneer of Alaskan natural history.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Steller, Georg Wilhelm. 1988. lournal of a voyage with Bering, 1741 -1742. O.W. Frost, ed.,

translated by Margritt A. Engel and O.W. Frost. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Swanston, Douglas N. 1969. Mass wasting in coastal Alaska. Portland: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, PNW-83.

Swanston, Douglas N. 1970. Mechanics of debris avalanching in shallow till soils of

southeast Alaska. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, PNW-103.

Taylor, Ray F. 1959. Forest research and the state of Alaska's forests. Dummy copy and

preliminary manuscript labeled Station Paper 11, Alaska Forest Research Center, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Juneau, Alaska, January 1959. In storage room,

Juneau Forestry Sciences Laboratory.

Taylor, Ray. (n.d.) "Early forest research in Alaska." Unpublished typescript and notes, in

storage room, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Juneau, AK.

Thilenius, John F. 1981. Steller's journey on Kayak Island, Alaska, July 20, 1741: Where and

how did he go? Unpublished typescript (30 Sept 1981), Forestry Sciences Laboratory,

Juneau, AK.

Ugolini, F.C.; Bormann, B.T.; and Bowers, F.H. 1984. Soil development and the evolution of

forest ecosystems in southeast Alaska [Abstractl Gustavus, AK: Glacier Bay Science

Symposium, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Glacier Bay National

Park and Preserve.

210
Van Ballenberghe, V. 1983. Extraterritorial movements and dispersal of wolves in southcentral

Alaska, lournal of Mammalogy 64: 168-171.

Van Ballenberghe, V. 1980. "Utility of multiple equilibrium concepts applied to moose

populations." North American moose conference and workshop 16:126-138.

Van Ballenberghe, Victor. 1987. Giants of the wilderness: Alaskan moose. National

Geographic 181: 260-280.

Van Cleve, K.; Chapin, F.S. Ill; Flanagan, P.W. [and others]. 1986. Forest ecosystems in the

Alaskan taiga: A synthesis of structure and function. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Viereck, L.A.; Dyrness, C.T., eds. 1979. Ecological effects of the Wickersham Dome fire near

Fairbanks, Alaska. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report PNW-90.

Viereck, L.A.; Dyrness, C.T.; Batten, A.R.; and Wenzlick, K.J. 1992. The Alaska vegetation

classification. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-286.

Wallmo, Olof C; Schoen, John W. 1980. Response of deer to secondary forest succession in

southeast Alaska. Forest Science 26 (3): 448-462.

Webb, Melody. 1985. The last frontier: A history of the Yukon Basin of Canada and Alaska.

Albuquerque: Universitv of New Mexico Press.

Werner, R.A. 1964. White spruce seed loss caused by insects in interior Alaska. Canadian

Entomologist 96:1462-1464.

Werner, R.A.; Holsten, E.H. 1983. Mortality of white spruce during a spruce beetle outbreak

on the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska. Canadian lournal of Forest Research 13:96-101.

Werner, Richard A.; Hastings, Felton L; Holsten, Edward H.; and Jones, Alice S. 1986.

Carbaryl and lindane protect white spruce from attack by spruce beetles (Coleoptera:

Scolytidae) for three growing seasons, lournal of Economic Entomology 79 (4): 1121-1124.

White, Richard. 1980. Land use, environment, and social change: The shaping of Island

County, Washington. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

White, Richard. 1992. Discovering nature in North America, lournal of American History 79:

879-882.

Zasada, John C; Gregory, Robert A. 1969. Regeneration of white spruce with reference to

interior Alaska: a literature review. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Research Paper PNW-79.

211
Index1

2,4-D: effects on salmonids of, 1 37

A

Adak, 173

Adak, tree plantations at, 39

adaptive technology, subzero temperatures, 88-

89

Admiralty Island, 72; research at, 46; bear attacks

on, 32-34

aerial photography, 29-30; by U.S. Navy, 48;

forest resource surveys with, 146; forest survey

use of, 65-66; interpretation manuals for, 139-

140; of landslides, 96; stand-volume tables

from, 139-140

aerial spraying, alternatives to, I 37

Afognak Forest and Fish Culture Reserve,

established, 14

Afognak Island, studies of regeneration on, 1 33-

134

AFRC. See Alaska Forest Research Center

agency rivalries, as impediment to fisheries

research, 50-51

aircraft: access to research sites with, 1 65; as

lifeline for field crews, 66-67; contracting for

transport with,. 1 65; forest survey uses, 62-64;

hazards of, 68-69; low-bid contracting for, 67-

68; rescue operations with, 89

AIRIS design. 5ee Alaska Integrated Resource

Inventory System, 140

Alaska-cedar, 184

Alaska Conservation Society, founded, 86

Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 99;

cooperation with, 187-188; cooperative links at

Fairbanks, 86-87; cooperative research with,

157-159

Alaska Department of Natural Resources,

cooperation with, 153-154

Alaska Division of Lands, cooperative links at

Fairbanks, 86; cooperative relations with, 94;

cooperative research with, 92-93

Alaska Forest Research Center, 28-29;

dependence on Region 1 0 of, 47-48;

establishment of, 44-45; independence of, 43-

44, 47; interaction with Region 10 of, 192;

reorganized as Northern Forest Experiment

Station, 77-78; staffing of, 45-46; transportation

needs, 46-47; utilitarian priorities of, 43-44

Alaska Highway Department, cooperation with,

139-140

Alaska Integrated Resource Inventory System,

components of, 139

Alaska legislature, interactions with, 160-161

Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act,

143-144. See also ANILCA

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, 1 70;

ANILCA and origins in, 1 42-1 43; as impetus for

vegetation classification, 153-154; terms of,

117-118

Alaska Railroad: and development of the interior,

35; and fire concerns, 35; and fire research, 25-

26; and priorities for Research, 25; and the

Chugach National Forest, 35; as impetus for

research, 35; cooperation with, 176; federal

funding of, 37; influence on forest survey needs,

64

Alaska spruce beetle, 69-70

Alaska Spruce Log Program, federal funding for,

37-38

Alaska State Legislature, interaction with, 181-

182

Alaska Statehood Act, 69-70

Alaskan Purchase, 1867, 11

Albright College, 144

Alexander Archipelago Forest Reserve,

established, 16

Alexander Archipelago, surveys of, 13, 14

allowable cut, 113-116

Amchitka, tree plantations at, 39

anadromous salmonids, habitat requirements of,

185

1Personal names, although prevalent throughout the text, are not indexed because this history is built

around the scientific communities involved in forest research in Alaska, and for the purposes of this

study, individuals are important for their contributions within those communities and for the traditions

and networks they brought to those communities. Locales and programs of study provide the context for

those interactions, and by tracking those elements through this index, the reader may follow threads of

interconnection among different people and their community links.

213
ANILCA, 169, 171, 177, 180-187, 194;

implications for Research of, 1 50; implications

for studies in interior of, 1 70; mandates for

research in, 1 59-1 60; origins and evolution of,

1 54-1 56; Research funding from, 1 56-1 57

animal studies, 29

applied research, 180-181

aquatic ecology, 185

Arctic Fire Research Society, 91

Army air corps, bases in Alaska, 37

Army Corps of Engineers, 80

artificial stream channels, construction at Young

Bay, 73-74

Atomic Energy Commission, 86

Attu, tree plantations at, 39

Auke Bay Fisheries Lab, cooperation with, 137

B

baseline data,, gathering of, 5-6

basic science, 167-168

bear attacks, 32-34

bear, 157, 180, 189; encounters by field crews

with, 68

Beaver Creek Project, 144

Beluga, 140

Bering expedition, 1

Berner's Bay, 119

birch: insect relations in, 130; nutrient relations

of, 92-93

black spruce, 172, 85-86, 127; nutrient relations

of, 92-93; prescribed fire in, 131

black-headed budworm, 104; crisis of 1950s, 59

blowdown events, growth rates after, 138

boats: forest survey uses of, 62-63; sinkings of,

89-91; transportation and logistical support

with, 89

Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest, 177; access

to, 88-89; cooperative research at, 92-93;

dedication of, 85; established, 71-72; fire

research at, 123

boreal forest ecology, descriptions of, 10-11

botany, 163-164

Bowling Green State University, 97

budgetary constraints, 1 71-1 72; implications for

community spirit of, 1 74; implications for

cooperative work of, I 75; implications for

Fairbanks FSL of, 1 78; implications for Research

of, 155, 174

Bureau of Entomology, 108

Bureau of Land Management, 1 70, 189;

cooperation in rescue operations with, 89;

cooperation with, 1 53-1 54; cooperative links at

Fairbanks with, 86; fire control policies of, 122-

123

c

Cape Suckling, 189

caribou, 1 89

Caribou-Poker Creeks Watershed, 123;

established, 94; integration with multifunctional

unit, 128-129

CCC, crewhouse in Juneau, 35-36; facilities of,

45-46; Forest Service administration of, 35-36;

infrastructure development by, 35-36; Little Port

Walter facilities of, 35-36

Chandalar drainage, 91

Charley drainage, 87-88

Chatham Strait, 165-166

Chena drainage, 87-88

Chugach National Forest, 64, 116, 130, 166; and

railroad development, 35; and research needs,

35; cooperation with, 187-188; interactions

with staff at, 1 74; logging on, 37; outreach

programs at, 1 76; proposed expansion of, 143-

144; Research priorities on, 141

circumpolar cooperation, 170

Civilian Conservation Corps. See CCC

Clarke-McNary Act, 25-26, 71; fire management

mandates of, 36

classification systems, 2, 31; in Tenth Census

(1880), 13-14

clearcut logging: effects on forest productivity of,

167; effects on nutrient cycling of, 1 64; effects

on wildlife of, 157-158; effects on wildlife of,

159-160

climate studies, 87-88

coho salmon, 185

Cold Bay, tree plantations at, 39

Cold Regions Research and Engineering

Laboratory, 93-94; cooperation with, 129-130.

5ee also CRREL

Cold-weather research, federal funding for, 37

Colorado State University, 144, 185

Columbia River survey, 80

communications: FTS telephone network

linkages, 177; problems and technology, 62-63

community spirit, 126-127; fostering of, 134-135

214
computing issues, 131, 139-140, 145-147, 185-

186; community implications of, 1 50-1 52

Controller Bay, surveys of, 16

Cook Inlet, 64, I76; surveys of, 13

cooperative research, 1 90

cooperative studies, Alaska Forest Research

Center and, 46

Copper River Delta Institute, 187, 190

Copper River Delta, 188

Copper River drainage, 64, 176

Copper River Science Commission, 191 -192

Corvallis Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 125, 163

Crimean War, as impetus for Alaska forest

resource surveys, 11

CRREL, watershed studies, 93-94

D

d-2 controversy, 143-144

data management, 131, 172

deer, 157-161, 173, 189

District 8 (reorganized as Region 8), 36

Douglas-fir tussock moth, 141

ducks, 189

Duke University, 108, 144

E

ecological priorities, at Fairbanks, 86, 90

ecological relations, 183

ecological systems modeling, 145-146

economic development: as impetus for research,

142-143; PNW Station and priorities of, 24-25

economic priorities, pre-contact, 3

ecosystem management, 165, 189-190

Edna Bay, 38

Eilson Air Force Base, 39-40

entomology, 98-99, 104, 130, 162, 168-169, 176,

187

Environmental Protection Agency, 118-119

Evergreen State College, 1 63-1 64

Fairbanks Forestry Sciences Laboratory: building

design, 85; closure proposal, 178; dedication

of, 85; origins of, 81-82

Fairbanks Research staff, recruitment of, 125-126

family issues, 29, 125-126, 144; as consideration

in recruitment, 164; effects on research, 55-56

Federally Employed Women (FEW), 162

field conditions, 165-166

field crews, isolation and hazards of, 69

field work: as a recruitment lure, 130; forest

resource surveys with, 146

fire ecology, of interior Alaska, 90-91

fire management priorities, for interior Alaska, 91

fire management, support for, 132

fire protection concerns, and CCC, 36

fish habitat, 137; effect of logging on, 1 36; in

small tributary streams, 1 36

fish, as component of multiple use, 70-71

fisheries biology, 99, 163

Fisheries Research Institute, 101

fisheries, 1 62, 1 80; logging effects on, 49-50

float planes, forest survey uses, 62-64

forage requirements, 184-185

Forest Advisory Council: established, 24; links

with Weyerhauser Corporation, 24-25

forest conditions, surveys of, 16-17

forest diseases, 137

forest ecology, 157-158, 164; as focus of

multifunctional unit, 133

forest ecosystems, series on, 136

forest experiment station, proposed for Alaska, 32

forest fires, 59

forest insect surveys, 60, 137

forest pathology, 162-163; 168-169

Forest Pest Control Act of 1947, 59

forest productivity, 167

Forest Products Laboratory, 156

forest products research, 156

forest products, 177

forest regeneration, studies of, 132-133

Forest Reserve Act of 1891, 14

forest reserves: management by professional

foresters of, 1 6; Native management of, 5-6;

proposed for Alaska, 16; Russian management

of, 9-10

forest resource surveys, 32, 48, 95-96, 105, 138-

139, 169, 176; 1967 publication of, 111;

administrative headquarters of, 142;

assumptions of, 114-11 6; by Russian crews, 5-

6; by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 16;

federal funding for, 63-65; field crews and

working conditions, 63-65; in Tenth Census of

the United States (1880), 13-14; leadership

changes, 145; methods and technology, 60-62;

of coastal and interior Alaska, 59; political

215
implications, of, 109; prohibitive expense of,

109; resurvey schedules, 1 39; staff recruitment

for, 63-65; staffing issues, 144; staffing profile

for, 112; transportation and logistics for, 62-63

Forest Service Research: independence from

management of, 18,20-21, 192; origins of, 17-18

forest tree physiology, 1 63-1 64

frontiersmanship: budgetary implications of, 172;

community implications of, 27-28; dependence

on Region 10 and, 50-52; Fairbanks FSL as an

outgrowth of, 82-83; funding shortfalls and, 50-

52; gender bias of, 28; intergenerational

traditions of, 130; intergenerational transfer of,

164; recruiting lure of, 1 72

funding shortfalls, leadership strategies for, 134-

135

fur trade, American expeditions, 8-9

fur trade, British expeditions, 3-4, 8-9

fur trade, Russian expeditions, 3-4, 8-9

fur trade, Spanish expeditions, 6-8

G

geese, 189

genetics, 136, 170

geology research, at Juneau, 98

Glacier Bay, 166; surveys of, 14

goats, 157

grantsmanship, 194

greenhouses, 171-172; Juneau facilities for, 31;

seedlings for replanting from, 1 38

growth and yield studies, 25

H

H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest, 125

Haines State Forest, 120

Harriman expedition, 15

Harvard University, 121

Hawk Inlet, 165, 168

helicopters, forest survey uses of, 62-64

hemlock sawfly, 104

herbicides, 170-171

historical events, estimating growth and yield

after, 138

Hollis townsite, 55

Hollis, 136

hydrology, 162, 1 63

I

infrared photography, forest resource surveys

with, 140

insects, 124

integrated research, 170

interagency cooperation, 176

interdisciplinary team research, 125-126

interior Alaska, ecosystems of, 123

International Biological Program (IBP), 125

intersite cooperation, budgetary impediments to,

134-135

Iowa State College, 31

Iowa State University, 84, 144, 155-156, 162

irrigation, 172

K

Kayak Island, 1-2, 194

Kenai Peninsula, 64, 82, 130, 176; forest

conditions of, 48; surveys of, 16

Ketchikan Pulp Company, 101; allotment on

Prince of Wales Island, 60-61; relations with

Alaska Forest Research Center, 44-45

Kodiak bear, trail breaking for field crews, 67-68

Kodiak, 173

Kuskokwim drainage, surveys of, 10

L

laboratory facilities, support for, 1 60-1 61

land management policies, 163

Landsat imagery, forest resource surveys with, 146

landscape quality, 124

landslides, 59

large organic debris, 185

Limestone Inlet RNA, 56, 104

line-item funding, as impediment to

multifunctional research, 132

Little Port Walter, CCC facilities at, 35-36

lodgepole pine, 172

Long Term Ecological Reserve See LTER

Long Term Ecosystem Productivity, 167

LTER, 179, 187

Lutz spruce, 176

216
M

Matanuska Valley, 64, 82

Maybeso Experimental Forest: clearcut logging

on, 55-56; clearcuts on, 105; cooperative

studies at, 137-138; established, 49-50;

landslides on clearcuts at, 96, 98; logging of,

72-73; logistical concerns on, 55-56; paired

watersheds on, 55-56; salmon habitat studies at,

73-74; staffing issues on, 55-56

Maybeso Valley, 46; as a representative site, 54-5;

experimental research at, 54-55; mass wasting

at, 95

McGill University, 136

McSweeney-McNary Act, 26-27

mensuration, 163

Michigan State University, 58, 99, 162

moose, 157, 1 73, 1 80, 189; on the Kenai

Peninsula, 32

mountain goats, 180

multifunctional unit, 71-72, 121-123, 163, 177;

budgetary concerns of, 127-128; community

atmosphere of, 132; implementation at juneau

of, 132-133; leadership changes of, 141-142;

leadership of, 124; staffing of, 133

Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act, 69-70

multiple use, 127, 181; evolving models of, 146-

147

multiresource inventory: evolution of, 145-147;

origins of, 139

N

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA), cooperation with, 142

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 78,

118-119

National Forest: interior Alaska, 175; planning for,

12 7-128; proposals for interior of, 138-140,

143-144

National Park Service, cooperation with, 154

National Science Foundation, funding support

from, 126-127

National Weather Service, interagency

cooperation with, 91, 129-130

Native Claims Settlement Act, 120; implications

for forest survey, 138-139

Native Corporations, 117-118, 189; influence on

research of, 11 8; interaction with, 1 81 -1 82

Native issues: Alaska Native Brotherhood, 40; and

Tongass National Forest, 40; and human

ecology, 191; land claims, 117, 142-144;

landholdings in interior, 140; priorities of forest

management, pre-contact, 2; and roles in forest

surveys, 1 0; and timber liquidation sales, 170

Naval air stations, federal funding for, 37

New York State College, 99

Nordic Forest Research Council, 175

North Carolina State University, 130

Northern Alaska Environmental Society, 86

Northern Arizona University, 144

Northern Forest Experiment Station: administrative

priorities at, 79-80; administrative style at, 84-

85; frontiersmanship culture at, 78-79; merged

with PNW Station, 106-110; reorganized from

theAFRC, 77-78

Norton Bay, surveys of, 16

nursery facilities, 171-172

nutrient cycling, 164, 167-168, 185

O

Ohio State University, 95

Old Tom Creek RNA, 56

old-growth forests, 173, 185; community types in,

181

Olympia Laboratory, 164

Orca Inlet, 188

Oregon State Game Commission, 136

Oregon State University, 58, 95, 99, 108, 124-

125, 131, 136, 141, 144, 162-164, 166

Outdoor Recreation Resource Review

Commission, 69-70

outdoor recreation, as component of multiple use,

70-71

P

Pacific Northwest Station, establishment of, 18-19

Pack Creek RNA, 56

paired watershed studies: assumptions of, 73; at

Young Bay, 72

Pennsylvania State University, 162; Cooperative

Wildlife Research Unit at, 124

permafrost, 154; logistical implications of, 129-

130; studies of, 87-88

permanent plots, established, 87-88

plant associations, 153-154

plant ecology, 163

plant physiology, 164

217
plantations, by Russians, 9-10

PNW Station, 124-125, 195; administrative

reorganization of, 106-108, 121-122, 181-182;

and economic development in Alaska, 24-25;

and responsibility for Alaska Research, 19-20;

interaction with, 129-130; leadership changes

at, 141, 155-156, 186-187; Research priorities

at, 186; responsibility for Alaska Research, 106-

110

podzolization, 166-167

Porcupine drainage, 89, 140; rescue operations

in, 89

preservation priorities, 120-121, 147-148, 157,

166

Pribilof Islands, surveys of, 10

Prince of Wales Island, 163; experimental forest

on, 49; fisheries at, 49-50; logging on, 49-50

Prince William Sound, 1 94; surveys of, 13,16

Program Management Committee, 181-182

Project Chariot, 86

provenance studies, 172-173

Prudhoe Bay, 11 6

PSW Station, 168-169

Public Land Law Review Commission, report of,

118

pulp industry, 29; studies ot, 30

pulpwood industry, 57-58; development of, 46-

47; promotion of, 18-19; research basis for, 18-

19; research supporting development of, 45-46;

suggested development in Alaska of, 15

R

radio communications, rescue operations, 89

range, as component of multiple use, 70-71

recreation: and scenic resources, 136-137; as a

focus for research, 120; quality of, 124

recreational use, 157

red alder, 184

red squirrels, cooperative studies of, 93

regeneration studies, 105, 137-138

regeneration, methods of, 170-171

Region 10: cooperation with, 121, 142, 156-157,

176, 187; forest resources survey on National

Forests by, 143-144; interaction with, 133-134,

157-161, 165-166, 168, 174, 181-182, 192;

isolation from, 92-93; leadership changes at,

133-134; relations with, 95, 110; reorganized

(from Region 8), 36

Region 8, reorganized (as Region 10), 36

reindeer studies, 32

research climate, at Juneau lab, 97

Research Natural Areas, 56-57, 125, 187; criteria

for establishment of, 57. See also RNA and

name of RNA

riffle sifter, 101-102

Rocky Mountain Station, 144, 157

rodent populations, 184-185

Rosie Creek Fire, 177

Russian American Company, fur trade monopoly,

8-9

Russian American Company, timber needs, 9-10

Russian Navy: administration of Alaska, 10; in

Crimean War, 11; scientific training in, 10

s

sagebrush rebellion, Alaska manifestations of,

149-150; Forest Service as target of, 150

Saint Petersburg Academy of Sciences,

expeditions sponsored by, 5-6

salmon habitat, 132-133; effects of logging on,

50-51; studies of, 72-73, 105

salmon spawning, 189

salmon, effects of logging on, 46-47

salmonids, habitat requirements of, 100

satellite photography, forest resource surveys with,

140

seed collections, 172-173, 175

seed supply, 170

seed zones, 171 -172

selection cutting, 184

Seward Skills Center, 172

Seward, 173

shelterwood cutting, 184

Shemya, tree plantations at, 39

Sierra Club, 136; lawsuits of, 78, 118-120

silviculture, 29, 162, 170

site productivity, 163

Sitka black-tailed deer, 136, 180

Sitka spruce, 168, 170, 184; plantations of, 10

Sitka, 119

slope stability, 163, 184

Sno-Cat, winter travel with, 129-130

Soil Conservation Service, cooperation with, 139,

142, 153-154

soil: and water relations, 124; cohesion, 184;

development, 168; mass movement, 137;

sampling, 38; types, estimating growth and

yield with, 138

218
soil science, 87-88, 141, 162

Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, 181

Southern Station, 161, 185

spear-marked black moth, 69-70, 130

spruce beetle, 176

staff turnover, effect on multifunctional unit of,

135

streambed sediment research, 101-103

subsistence issues, wildfire effects on, 85-86

successional sequence studies, 87-88

Susitna drainage, 139-140

Sustained Yield Forest Management Act (of 1 944),

39-40

swans, 189

Syracuse University, 29, 98-99, 104

T

taiga ecosystems, 127

taiga, ecological relations in, 124

Talkeetna, 140

Tanana drainage. 64 , 87-88, 140; flood of 1967,

93-94; rescue operations, 89-90; surveys of, 10-

11

Tanana Valley State Forest, 1 77

technology transfer, 158, 167

Tenth Census (United States), assessment of

Alaska resources in, 13-14

timber inventory, 137, 124, 127, 157; ANILCA

mandates for, 163

timber production, implications for research of,

163

timber, as component of multiple use, 70-71

Tongass National Forest, 92, 116, 154-156, 166;

forest resources survey of, 60-61; landslides on

clearcuts at, 96; proposals for pulpwood

harvests on, 23-24; pulpwood harvests on, 47-

48; research activities on, 95; Research

priorities for, 141

Tongass Timber Act, 40, 176

Tongass Timber Supply Fund, Research allocations

from, 1 54-1 56. See also TTSF.

transportation issues: and aircraft access, 165; and

Alaska Forest Research Center, 46-47; and cost

as factor in selecting administrative sites, 142-

143; and hazards of field work, 33-34; and

logistical support, 34; and reliance on boats,

33-34, 46-47; and road access, 165

tree plantations, during World War Two, 38-39

TTSF, 169, 179, 194; administrative guidelines for,

1 60-161; administrative implications of, 161 ;

implications for Research of, 1 83-1 84; PMC

administration of, 182; Research allocations

from, 154-156; research funding from, 159-160,

1 86; timber production mandates of, 1 80-1 81

u

United States Army Corps of Engineers,

cooperative relations with, 94;

United States Army, 98-99, 155-156;

administrative authority in Alaska, 12;

cooperation in rescue operations, 90;

cooperation with, 129-130; CRREL established

by, 93-94; surplus supplies from, 1 72

United States Bureau of Land Management,

cooperative relations with, 94

United States Federal Water Quality

Administration, cooperative relations with, 94

United States Fish and Wildlife Service,

cooperation with, 153-154

United States Geological Survey, cooperation

with, 94, 142

United States National Weather Service,

cooperative relations with, 94

United States Navy, 84, 98-99, 108, 141; funding

from, 172-173

United States Soil Conservation Service,

cooperative relations with, 94

U-2 photography, forest resource survey with,

142-144

Umnak, tree plantations at, 39

Unalaska, surveys of, 10

United States Civil War, influence on perceptions

of Alaska, 11-12

University College of North Wales, 1 70

University of Alaska Farm, 82

University of Alaska, 94; cooperation with, 127,

145-146, 187

University of Alaska, Fairbanks, 69, 81-83, 86";

cooperation in LTER with, 179; cooperation

with, 92-93, 153-154,187

University of Alaska, interaction with, 181-182

University of Alaska, Palmer, cooperation with,

153-154

University of Arizona, 162

University of Buffalo, 99

University of California, Berkeley, 58, 99

University of Colorado, 58, 87-88

University of Idaho, 58, 80

219
University of Indiana, 88

University of Michigan, 57, 58, 92, 97, 121

University of Minnesota, 98-99, 121

University of Montana, 90, 144

University of Oregon, 58

University of Washington, 28, 46, 99, 101, 108,

163-164, 166, 185; Fisheries Research Institute,

136

University of Wisconsin, 104

university support, Research need for, 142

unpopulated areas, fire policies for, 1 32

utilitarian priorities, 112, 120-121, 147-148, 157-

1 58, 1 80; and Forest Advisory Council, 24-25;

and PNW Station, 24-25; at Fairbanks, 86, 90;

in Branch of Research, 18-19; in Tenth Census

(1880), 14-15; of research at Maybeso Valley,

54; pre-contact, 3

V

Valdez, 173

vegetation classification system, interagency

cooperation in development of, 153-154

vegetation types, estimating growth and yield

after, 138

Village Corporations, 117-118

w

wanigans, 103-104

Ward Cove, pulp mill at, 41

Washington Creek, fire research at, 131

Washington State University, 162

Water Pollution Control Act, 137

water relations, 137

water, as component of multiple use, 70-71

watershed research, 72, 100

watershed studies, cooperative relations with

CRRELon, 93-94

weather station records, 172

western coniferous biome project, 125

western hemlock, 168

Western Union Telegraph Company, scientific

corps, 11-12

white spruce, 170, 172, 177; ecology of, 91 -92;

studies of, 87-88

Wickersham Dome fire, 122-123, 131;

interdisciplinary focus around, 126-1 27;

research on, 126-127; synthesis publication on,

126-127

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 118-119

Wilderness Act, 70-71

wilderness areas, protection of, 157

wilderness: as a recreational resource, 69-70; role

in multiple-use management, 118-119

wildfire, 124, 154; as focus for multifunctional

unit, 131; ecology of, 127; in the interior, 85-86

wildlife, 162, 163; as component of multiple use,

70-71; behavior, 184-185; biology, 157-161,

170, 173, 185, 189; habitat, 137, 163, 184-

185; management, 184-185; studies of, 32

Willow, 140

windthrow, 167

wolf predation, 173

women scientists, at Fairbanks, 87-88

World War Two, impact on Research, 27-28

Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve,

189

Y

Yale University, 15, 28-29, 38, 48, 55, 72, 139,

164

Young Bay Experimental Forest, 94; established,

72

Yukon drainage, 87-88, 91; expeditions in, 10-11

220
Geier, Max G. 1998. Forest Science research and scientific communities in Alaska:

a history of the origins and evolution of USDA Forest Service research in Juneau,

Fairbanks, and Anchorage. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-426. Portland OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

220 p.

Research interest in the forests of Alaska can be traced from the early 1990s back to

1741, when Georg Steller visited Kayak Island. Given the great research needs and

logistical costs in Alaska, support for forest research from this early European contact

through the present was seldom adequate. Scientists at Juneau, Fairbanks, and

Anchorage in the late 20th century have nevertheless met research goals despite

limited funding and agency mandates for timber production. They, with cooperators,

have broadened the range of research questions, but budgetary concerns and the

political environment still influence issues studied in the search for usable knowledge

about Alaska's forests.

Keywords: Forest research, Alaska, history, ecology, fisheries, entomology, wildlife,

survey, inventory, timber, taiga, Tongass, Chugach, Pacific Northwest, fire, clearcut,

salmon, watershed, landslide, experimental forest, research natural area, aerial

photography, remote sensing, transportation, boats, aircraft

The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of

Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple

use management of the Nation's forest resources

for sustained yields of wood water, forage, wildlife,

and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation

with the States and private forest owners, and

management of the National Forests and National

Grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to

provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

prohibits discrimination in its programs on the basis

of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability,

political beliefs, and marital or familial status. (Not all

prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with

disabilities who require alternative means of communication

of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)

should contact the USDA TARGET Center at

(202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint, write the Secretary of Agriculture,

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250,

or call (800) 245-6340 (voice), or (800) 720-1127 (TDD).

USDA is an equal employment opportunity employer.

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 S.W. First Avenue

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, Oregon 97208-3890