You are here

Op-Ed|National Park Service Has Correct Approach To Bear Viewing At Katmai National Park

Share
Brooks River bear at Katmai National Park/copyright Rebecca Latson

A former NPCA official believes the National Park Service has made the right decision with facilities at Brooks River in Katmai National Park/Copyright Rebecca Latson

Editor's note: Jim Stratton, who retired recently after 12 years with the National Parks Conservation Association in its Alaska office, and previously was director of Alaska's state park system, is well-familiar with the bear viewing situation at Katmai National Park and Preserve. While former Katmai Superintendent Ray Bane believes the Park Service is making the wrong decision for visitor services at Brooks River by opting to build a permanent elevated bridge across the river, Mr. Stratton supports the project.

For the past 10 years, I have been actively engaged in the discussions about the future of Brooks Camp at Katmai National Park and Preserve and whether or how to implement the plan adopted in 1995 to have the federal government pay to move both Brooks Lodge and the National Park Service facilities to the south side of the Brooks River and out of prime brown bear habitat.

Twenty years ago, when U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens had the ability to appropriate the funds to make this plan a reality, it was probably a good idea. But 20 years is a generation ago and Ted Stevens is no longer around to pay for it. Given the fiscal constraints on both the Park Service and the rest of the federal government, finding the money to move Brooks Camp is simply not going to happen.  And even if they had the money, I’m not sure this would be a top priority within NPS given the HUGE maintenance backlog nationwide. 

In light of this fiscal reality, I believe the Park Service is doing all it can to implement the intent of the 1995 plan and should be thanked, not scorned.

The Park Service has committed to and has started moving its facilities and relocating them to the south side of the river.  New staff cabins and a maintenance facility have already been built.  This decision has been made and is being implemented.  There are plans to move the existing staff cabins currently located on the north side to the south side as well.  Once the new elevated walkway is in place, the opportunity also exists to move lodge staff housing to the south side. The new bridge will act as a utility corridor and allow the electrical generator and associated support facilities to also move to the south side of the river. While not all that the 1995 plan called for, this is a significant reduction in facilities in bear habitat.

Recognizing that the Park Service is moving to the south side of the Brooks River and the lodge will stay on the north side, there needs to be a way to move people and supplies back and forth across the river. The current floating bridge is frequently closed due to bear traffic on the trails leading to the bridge. Key to implementing what the Park Service can and is doing is an elevated walkway so lodge staff, visitors, and Park Service personnel can freely move back and forth across the river.

Not only will the elevated walkway get people completely out of the mouth of the river and reduce the daily interaction between bears and people trying to get across the floating bridge, but the Park Service will no longer have to stabilize the riverbanks in order for the floating bridge to work.  The river mouth will be allowed to act like it should naturally. 

Fishing bear at Brooks River at Katmai National Park/Copyright Rebecca Latson

Viewing platforms, and a good zoom lens, brings bears close at Brooks River in Katmai National Park/Copyright Rebecca Latson

The elevated walkway gets people completely out of the mouth of the river and away from the bears.  I like the elevated walkway for this reason and I believe it will be a great way for visitors to view the bears without getting in their way – like the elevate walkway has worked at Brooks Falls.  Furthermore, this new plan has the barge facility also moving away from the mouth of the river.  Another positive step to reduce human bear interactions.

I spent some time walking the proposed site for the new Brooks Camp facility south of the river. It is on a bluff above a beaver pond and is a beautiful site with a great view. I also saw that it is really an impractical place to move the new lodge.  The distance from the river – the focus of both bear viewing and fishing activity – would require a shuttle system. It is a LONG walk.  It just doesn’t make long-term financial sense (if you could even pay for the new lodge) to saddle the Park Service with having to maintain and operate a shuttle system.  Especially in times of shrinking budgets.  Not to mention the additional carbon footprint. 

Futhermore, the environmental impact statement for the elevated walkway made some changes to the 1995 plan that includes not building a float plane base on Naknek Lake at the mouth of the river, but encouraging more landings on Brooks Lake (on the south side) when the weather allows.  To encourage more air taxi landings on Brooks Lake, rather than the current beach on Naknek Lake, there needs to be a way for people to move back and forth across the river.  Hence the new elevated walkway.

The walkway went through an EIS process and there was a lot of discussion about options and what should be done. This was not done in the dark or behind closed doors. It was a very public process. I know that some current and former Park Service personnel are not happy with this situation, but I believe given the reality of the fiscal environment, the agency is doing its best to reduce human bear conflicts at Brooks River.

Comments

I am aware of Jim Stratton's close working relationship with the National Park Service regarding Brooks River, and I respect his opinion. However, I must take exception to his vision for Brooks River and what he characterizes as fruitless efforts to bring the care and management of this amazing area into compliance with the basic tenets of the National Park Service Organic Act and the Redwood Act. One sure way of losing a struggle is to quit trying.

The primary goal of the original Brooks River Area Final Development Concept Plan (DCP) is to remove all development from the north side of Brooks River along with intrusive aircraft and boat access activities. The north side of the river would return to a natural state where sensitive bears, particularly sows with cubs, can find some degree of refuge from human disturbances. The great majority of bear viewing by park visitors takes place along the south side of Brooks River. Under the original DCP this will continue.

Jim asserts that the opportunity to accomplish the original Final DCP objectives was lost with the passing of Senator Ted Stevens who might have arranged funding. In fact Senator Stevens openly opposed the move and put up roadblocks to any funding to carry it out.

Stratton describes accompanying NPS officials to Brooks River to identify the issues of moving Brooks Camp. His assertion that Brooks Camp will not move apparently reflects a consensus of the NPS workgroup. If this is true, it was incumbent on the NPS to share this information with the public. It would appear park service officials instead chose a strategy of "amendments" to remove basic essentials of the original plan and substitute largely cosmetic actions.

Stratton asserts the National Park Service is doing all it can to move Brooks Camp and deserves our appreciation for its efforts. Yet, in the same article he acknowledges that existing commercial operations at the current site of Brooks Camp will continue, the disruptive aircraft and boats traffic along Naknek Lake beach will go on, an expensive permanent bridge with viewing platform pullouts and extended walkways along the north side of the river will be constructed, and that there is no plan to focus efforts on the preparation of the selected relocation site. The claim that safe aircraft operations are only possible directly in front of Brooks Camp is unfounded. I piloted light floatplanes into and out of the Brooks River area and am confident that there are viable alternatives for safe operations. How does all this constitute a concerted effort on the part of NPS management to carry out the objectives of the original DCP? It seems more accurate to conclude that the primary objectives of the original DCP are incrementally being abandoned.

Jim Stratton claims the bridge will completely remove people out of the mouth of the river. That is unlikely to happen unless sport fishing is banned along the lower river. Placing people on elevated structures spanning virtually the entire lower half of a major bear feeding stream is not reducing stress to the bears, particularly the more sensitive members such as sows with cubs. This is the expert opinion of eminent bear biologist, Dr. Barrie Gilbert.

Decisions as to the future of Brooks River must be founded on scientific research. It is significant that three respected bear biologists who had endorsed the Final Brooks River Development Concept Plan withdrew their support for the amended plan. Their rejection of the current plan reflects a growing concern that the welfare of the affected bear population will be adversely impacted by the on-going expansion of facilities and human activities at Brooks River. In addition to these respected scientists others who have gone on record expressing serious reservations with the deviations from the original final DCP include two former superintendents of Katmai National Park, a former director for the Alaska Chapter of the Sierra Club and accomplished authors of Alaska's natural history.

The primary attraction at Brooks River is not the scenery or inanimate geological features. It is the bears, one of the most intelligent and complex specie of wildlife in North America. These animals are more than mere objects providing public entertainment. In their natural setting they have much to teach us about the complexities of nature. However, that requires we respect their fundamental needs and not overly impose our presence on their habitat.

The original goals of the Final Brooks River Area DCP completed in 1996, can be accomplished. It will take perseverance and willingness on the part of the NPS and individuals committed to the protection of our nation's natural heritage to refuse to quit in this quest. The only acceptable alternative is to begin afresh with the creation of a new development concept plan based on the highest possible standards for the management of this iconic area of our National Park System. A new beginning would include the possible removal of the commercial and administrative complex of Brooks Camp and relocation well away from critically sensitive habitat.

G. Ray Bane
Former Katmai National Park Superintendent


Pardon my failure to more closely edit my last post. Please change "two superintendents" to "a superintendent."


It is disappointing to read Mr. Stratton's editorial and to think that I have financially supported NPCA in the past. It seems that he has fallen hook, line, and sinker for the Katmai National Park and Preserve's plan for building an elevated bridge and walkway system over the Brooks River. His op-ed reads as though it was taken straight from the pages of the Brooks River Visitor Access EIS.

Mr. Stratton states that "The Park Service has committed to and has started moving its facilities and relocating them to the south side of the river. New staff cabins and a maintenance facility have already been built." While it is true that new facilities have been built on the south side of the river, no old facilities have yet been removed or replaced. Instead they have been repurposed to address a lack of space in the poorly planned existing Brooks Camp facilities. At this time there is no plan to remove the former maintenance shop on the north side of Brooks River, and the new housing on the south side is being used to supplement the inadequate housing on the north side. Although "the opportunity also exists to move lodge staff housing to the south side," this proposal is being resisted by the owners of Katmailand and there is no timeline for such a move to take place. The Park Service also does not have a defined timeline for removing or moving housing on the north side. This was addressed in the Brooks River Visitor Access Final EIS with a schematic on p. 11, but there is no funding or plans in place to remove housing in the piecemeal fashion shown in the schematic.

The claim that the elevated walkway will "get people completely out of the mouth of the river" is inaccurate and will continue to be inaccurate unless restrictions are placed on fishing the Brooks River. Anglers frequently approach bears within 50 yards up and down Brooks River, going so far as to haze them away from fishing spots when out of sight of National Park Service personnel. In recent years, growing numbers of photographers walk the river in waders as well so that they can approach bears within 50 yards without the presence of NPS employees to discourage them.

Despite Katmai's repeated claims that the elevated bridge and walkway will reduce bear-human conflict, there were no statistics in the EIS that supported such claims. Though the park has collected data on Bear Management Report Forms for years, this data is not cited as evidence that the bridge will result in reduced bear-human conflict. Even casual visitors to Brooks River remark on how frequently they encounter bears within the boundaries of Brooks Camp, in close proximity to Brooks Lodge and other buildings. The location of the developed area between Naknek Lake and Brooks River situates it in the midst of a bear highway, and bears are frequently caught between people and buildings as they attempt to make their way from the river to the lake or vice versa. When sows with cubs are present, crowds of people frequently chase them from one location to another and disregard the instructions of park rangers to give the bears space. The noise of incoming planes frequently forces family groups to flee the Naknek Lake beach and move into the area amongst the Brooks Camp buildings, where they ping pong between groups of people while trying to move on. While an elevated bridge and walkway may diminish some bear-human conflict in the area known as the "Corner," adjacent to the Brooks River on the north side, it will do absolutely nothing to address the many bear-human interactions that take place every day along the Naknek Lake beach, campground trail, adjacent to the lodge cabins and dining hall, etc.

One aspect of this plan to move NPS housing to the south side of the river, far removed from the lodge and campground, that is rarely acknowledged is that with fewer NPS personnel stationed on the north side of the Brooks River, there will be fewer people to address the bear-human conflicts that occur as bears attempt to traverse the bear highway between Naknek Lake and Brooks River. Once the majority of NPS personnel go off duty in the evening, it is not uncommon to come across groups of visitors approaching bears within 50 yards or blocking their paths of travel. Off duty NPS employees frequently respond to these situations as they come and go from the housing area. Without their eyes and ears, it is likely that bear-human conflicts will increase rather than decrease. Perhaps Katmailand will take this opportunity to haze bears in a similar manner as they do at Kulik Lodge, a private inholding within Katmai National Park and Preserve.

Mr. Stratton parrots Katmai's claim that the elevated bridge and walkway system is needed to provide dependable access back and forth across the Brooks River. The current floating bridge provides dependable access and has for years. This access may not always be timely, or convenient for those working on strict timelines, but it is reliable in the sense that people are able to move back and forth using it. Movement is usually restricted only for a few weeks in July and September, when bear concentrations are at their highest. A multimillion dollar bridge that expands the footprint at Katmai seems a high price to pay in a location where the visitor season only lasts from June-early October.

Just like the Brooks River Visitor Access EIS, Mr. Stratton's op-ed seems poorly rooted in facts. This bridge will do little to reduce bear-human conflicts on the north side of the river, particularly in the vicinity of Brooks Lodge. Without a fully developed plan for moving both NPS and concession facilities to the south side of Brooks River, the bridge will facilitate more convenient access for increasing numbers of visitors, and possibly increase crowding on the bear viewing platforms as well once visitors are able to move freely back and forth at all times.  Former Superintendent Ray Bane is on the right track with drawing attention to this project, and I hope that there is still time to prevent its construction.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.