CNPSR Comments on DENA Subsistence OHV Proposal

Superintendent
Denali National Park and Preserve
P.O. Box 9
Denali, AK 99755

Dear Paul,

The Coalition of National Park Service Retirees (CNPSR) is on record in opposition to opening of parts of Denali National Park and Preserve (DENA) to subsistence access via all-terrain vehicles other than snowmobiles and motorboats as specifically provided by ANILCA. We have seen nothing that convinces us to change our position on this issue. Indeed, we are concerned that the NPS has willfully ignored existing laws, regulations and official policies designed to protect and perpetuate the unique values of Denali by continuing to permit ATV access, particularly during months of thaw.

The following are excerpts from the original statement of CNPSR on the NPS proposal to permit subsistence access by residents of Cantwell, Alaska:

1. CNPSR is concerned by the proliferation of OHV access on federally managed conservation lands, including national parklands. The expanding use of off-road machines seriously stresses native flora and fauna, causes soil erosion, degrades water systems, scars landscapes and damages cultural resources. In addition to physical impacts, OHV traffic frequently competes with, and even excludes, legitimate human uses of park lands and resources, including traditional subsistence uses. Virtually all studies of ORV/ATV access find that such access invariably results in environmental damage. This damage is magnified by the fragile nature of the lands in Alaska.

2. Coalition members are familiar with ANILCA, including provisions related to subsistence. Several have personal experience in dealing with subsistence management. We appreciate the complex and frequently sensitive nature of subsistence issues facing park managers in Alaska. We also believe that it was the intent of Congress that ANILCA created parklands be afforded the full measure of protection mandated by the National Park Service Organic Act “except as expressly and specifically provided Congress.”

3. Sec. 811(a) of ANILCA specifically provides for the use of snowmobiles and motorboats for subsistence access and “other means of surface transportation traditionally employed.” Snowmobiles and motorboats are specific exceptions to the “traditionally employed” means of subsistence transportation. Traditional subsistence access would obviously include dog teams, pack dogs, foot travel, kayaks and other forms of historic non-motorized watercraft. However, the Park Service has arbitrarily determined that any form of surface transportation existing ten years prior to 1978, meets the basic qualification of being “customary and traditional” for purposes of subsistence access. This determination is questionable and would seem to set a standard that will very likely be extended to parklands beyond Denali. It should be noted that a National Park Service report on ATV use in Gates of the Arctic states, “ANILCA does not define mechanized vehicles of any kind as traditional means of transportation.” (Kunz and Troxel, 1988).

4. Based on NPS data, the population of Cantwell has increased markedly over the past three decades. In 1970, Cantwell had 62 residents. The population grew to 222 by the year 2000, an increase of roughly 360%. (NPS Subsistence History). The majority of this growth was generated by the influx of individuals with no historic ties to traditional subsistence activities on parklands. By any reasonable standard, the subsistence resident zone status of Cantwell should be reexamined and possibly replaced by individual subsistence use permits for those residents who do have historic ties to subsistence on parklands. To grant community-wide special ATV access privileges to large number of residents who do not have direct ties to traditional subsistence is questionable.

5. Most so-called “historic ORV access routes” on parklands were originally winter haul trails or ice roads developed for the transport of heavy equipment to mining sites or for other commercial purposes. These trails were rarely used during the summer months due to the instability of the soils and difficulty crossing streams. A small number of local residents with access to tracked or large, 4-wheel drive vehicles may have also used these winter trails for hunting and hauling logs and firewood, but this was usually done when the ground was frozen. It was not until the advent of the small, personal 4-wheeler ATV in the early 1980s, that ORVs became widely used in rural areas for hunting and country travel. (Bane, 2001).

It has been the experience of the National Park Service and other land and resource managing agencies that, once established, ORV access is extremely difficult to manage. Under the best of circumstances, ORV users invariably extend their range in search of new lands, resources and experiences or to pioneer new routes around deteriorating trails. Budget and personnel and political considerations limit management’s ability to effectively monitor ORV access and to enforce regulations.

In summary, CNPSR supports Alternative 5 of the as outlined in the “Cantwell Subsistence ORV Management Preliminary Alternatives”. The Coalition believes that the subsistence needs of the residents of Cantwell can be satisfied through adjustments to the winter hunting season. We do not believe the exclusion of ATVs from parklands will work an undue hardship on traditional subsistence users. The CNPSR also recommends that the NPS initiate a review of the subsistence resident zone status of the community of Cantwell to determine if population and other developments have substantially altered its traditional character. If this proves to be the case, the resident zone designation can be replaced with an individual special use permit system based on the guidelines of ANILCA and the related Congressional Record.

Sincerely,

J. W. "Bill" Wade

Chair, Executive Council
Coalition of National Park Service Retirees