Home > Climate > Woody Tundra

Woody Tundra

Maps and Photos of woody tundra range type
 

Woody Tundra Climatic Overview

The Woody Tundra Range type describes a region of the arctic that lies inland from the coastal plain, but is climatically moderated by maritime effects.  In Alaska, the woody tundra range type lies between the high mountains of the Brooks Range at elevations up to 900 meters (about 3000 feet) and latitudes of 69º North and the barren tundra of the North Slope, near sea level.  It also reaches as far south as Unalakleet, latitude 63.5º north, where it abuts the coast.  Temperatures tend to be very cool to cold, ranging from average winter lows of -31ºC (-23.8°F), often lower than -41ºC (-41.8°F), to summer highs reaching 16ºC (60.8°F).  The frost-free season is short, lasting from mid June to late September or early October.  These cold temperatures counteract the humidity of the area.  The woody tundra stands in a rain shadow of the Brooks Range and receives very little precipitation, ranging from an annual average precipitation of 134mm (5.3 in.) at Umiat Station to 330mm (13.0 in.) at Unalakleet.  The precipitation is concentrated mainly in the summer months, increasing in June and reaching a peak late August.  There is usually less than 20mm (0.8 in.) monthly precipitation between November and April.  Winds tend to be persistent, blowing at 50-100 kilometers per hour (about 30-60 mph).

Woody Tundra Soils

    The region of the woody tundra is vast and extremely remote.  Because of this, detailed soil studies have not been performed.  Much of the soils data available for this range type have been extrapolated from very few detailed soil surveys.  Available data sources include the STATSGO vegetative mapping, satellite imagery, and educated guesses.  All of the soils in this range type are permafrost soils (Alaska Gazetteer 2000) with continuous permafrost at the northern latitudes and discontinuous permafrost in the coastal, lower latitude regions (Young 1989).  According to the STATSGO data (STATSGO), just over 20 per cent of the soils in this range type are rough mountainous lands, with another 11 per cent classified as an additional four types of rough mountainous lands.  All of these soils are Gelisols, which indicates permafrost within 100cm (39.4 in.) of the soil surface, and/or have Gelic material within 100cm of soil surface and permafrost within 200cm (78.7 in.) (Soil Taxonomy 1999).  The soils have a suborder of orthel, meaning that they are young soils with little profile development and have no special features (Brady and Weil 2004).  The soils of this region are mostly glacial moraines and fluvial deposit.  The topography of the woody tundra range type in Alaska includes the foothills of the northern Brooks Range and spans north towards the North Slope.  There are many drainages flowing from the mountains toward the Beaufort Sea, which carve deep and sometimes broad valleys in the mountain slopes. As the land stretches toward the coastal plain and loses elevation, glacial outwash is evident (Soil Taxonomy 1999) and the soils become different pergelic classes, pergelic indicating moist, cold, newly formed soils (Brady and Weil 2004).  The pergelic cryaquepts consist of nearly ten per cent of the soils and indicate pergelic soils that experience cryoturbation, or frost churning, are fully saturated, and are either gravely or have some loam material present (STATSGO). For the most part, the soils of the woody tundra show very little variation.  The main differences present are due to the extent of erosion: whether the soil is still rocky and high on the mountain slopes or has crumbled and deposited to lower elevations.  The main factor inhibiting the development of these soils is the climatic element of cold temperatures and very little annual precipitation.  Other factors are the inability for organic matter or living organisms to affect much change due to a short frost-free season and the presence of permafrost.  Additionally, most tundra soils tend to be acidic (Walker et. al. 2001).  Generally, soil surface layers erode naturally at a rate of no more than three centimeters per century (Grasslands and Tundra 1985).  The woody tundra range is a dynamic system with powerful forces of cryoturbation, runoff, and build-up of organic matter, animal activity, and global warming all having a heavy influence on the further development of these soils.

Vegetative Community of the Woody Tundra Range Type

    Usually when rangelands are mentioned, people tend to think of the Great Plains and an abundance of grasses.  Amazingly, the woody tundra range type supports a vast wildlife population that can sustain quite well on the vegetation present there.  The woody tundra range is the area where the high alpine tundra of the Brooks Range gives way to the lower elevations, the shrubs, lichen and tussocks of the river drainages, and eventually transforms into the barren tundra of the arctic slope. Because this range type follows the Brooks Range north-facing slope, there is very little southern aspect available.  The lack of solar radiation on the predominantly north-facing slopes, along with the dark arctic winters, cool temperatures, steady dry winds, low precipitation, and young, undeveloped soils, mandates that the vegetation be highly specialized to adapt to these forbidding conditions. The vegetation of the woody tundra range type consists of lichens (Northern reindeer Lichen, Cladina stelaris L.), tussock grasses (Parnassia palustris L. and Holcus alpinus Sw.), cotton grasses (Eriophorum callitrix Cham.), low and tall deciduous shrubs (dwarf arctic birch, B. glandulosa L.), and dwarf evergreen shrubs (juniperus communis L.) (Circumpolar, n.d.).  According to Dr. Skip Walker at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (Circumpolar, n.d.), the hills and slopes of the woody tundra are covered 50 – 100 % with vegetation, mixed with patches of bare soil exposed by cryoturbation.  This cover is achieved with a mixture of low-lying lichens and mosses below with shrub growth above.  An example of this is in the Russian woody tundra where a combination of willow and other shrubs grow together with a moss ground cover.  The shrubs consist of blueberry (Vaccinium caespotosum, L.), cranberry (Vaccinium vitis-edaea, L.), dwarf arctic birch (B. glandulosa, L.), crowberry (Empetrum nigrum, L.), valerian (Valerian bracteosa Britt.) (Anderson 1974) [Editorial note: the author of this article supplied an incomplete or incorrect reference. --JK], and others, all of which are common in Alaska as well.  The mosses Pleurozium schreberi, Aulacommium turgidum, Campthecium trichoides, and Drepanocladus uncimatus, grow under the shrub stands in the cool soils (Tyrtikov 1976).  Tundra soils have an abundance of microorganisms, predominately bacteria, with a substantial portion consisting of algae.  Aside from the case of mosses and lichens growing under a shrub canopy, the tundra vegetation communities have few layers or only one layer.  (Bowen 1971).  Most of the shrub plants reproduce easily even when heavily stripped of foliage as occurs when moose browse.  The shrubs tend to grow where the soil depth is greatest, usually in the watershed deposit areas.  The lichens and mosses of the woody tundra show heavy degradation from grazing animals (Circumpolar, n.d.), thus the need for the animals to migrate throughout the year.  Changes in the vegetative communities of the woody tundra have recently been detected, as more shrub species invade the tussock tundra, the cause of which is suspected to be due to global warming (Sturn et al. 2001).

Current Uses of the Woody Tundra

    Although it is a remote region, there are a surprising number of land uses currently in the woody tundra region.  Historically, the land was occupied by Inupiat peoples on the coastal plain and a small number of Athabaskan and Nunivit peoples.   The land stretching from the Brooks Range to the coastal plains was mainly used for subsistence hunting.  Today, there are several towns and villages in the woody tundra area, most of which are established around the Dalton Highway, with the exception of Umiat and Anatuvuk Pass.  This area of Alaska has four primary categories of current uses: subsistence living, industrial development, recreation uses, and research and education.  The Inupiaq of Alaska have traditionally traveled inland to the woody tundra region for hunting of caribou, wolf, musk ox, and grizzly bear, as well as other large and small mammals, migratory birds, and fish.  The land provides more than simple tangible resources, though.  It also provides the basis for spirituality, customs, and culture.

Western industry first moved into the arctic in search of gold and coal, of which little was found.  Later, oil was discovered on the coastal plain, and since the 1970’s, development of the oil resources has expanded rapidly.  As the oil supply on the coast diminishes, exploration moves inland.  Currently there are numerous tests wells located in the woody tundra region (Alaska Department of Natural Resources 2004).  Coal exploration in the Coleville mining district may resume, as there is an estimated 330 billion short tons of high ranking bituminous coal located in the area (AK DNR 2004).   The Red Dog mine on the southern slope of the Brooks Range holds one of the largest zinc reserves in the world, and is an active and expanding mining operation (Erickson 2004).  Large reserves of natural gas are known to exist on the coastal plain, and the current governor of Alaska, Governor Frank Murkowski, is pushing to build a gas pipeline.  The pipeline would be the largest private construction project ever undertaken in North America, costing an estimated $18 billion. This industrial development brings with it the need for airstrips, settlements, and roads.  Murkowski believes roads are the key to future economy, along with oil and gas development.  He has plans to develop roads east of Prudhoe Bay toward the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, west of the oil pipeline in the Brooks Range foothills, connecting Noatak to the Red Dog mine and a road over the Coleville River to accelerate oil field development (Murkowski 2004).

Numerous recreational uses exist in the woody tundra such as bird and wildlife viewing and photography, hiking, backpacking, and mountaineering, fishing, hunting, canoeing, skiing, dog sledding, eco tourism and general tourism, wilderness lodges, and air charters and flight seeing.  There are also cultural tours, natural history adventures, wilderness skills training, and educational programs.  There are over fifteen businesses that offer guiding and adventuring services in northern Alaska (AK Wilderness Recreation and Tourism Association 2004).  Many people also seek to spend time in the wilderness to provide a relief from busy society and to provide spiritual renewal.  As the famous champion of wilderness Robert Marshall said, “…no comfort, no security, no invention, no brilliant thought which the modern world had to offer could provide half the elation of the days spent in the little-explored, uninhabited world of the arctic wilderness” (Marshall 1970).

The arctic has fast become a vital platform for research in understanding global climate change.  Researchers of various disciplines such as climatologists, biologists, archeologists, glaciologists, chemists, and geologists, to name a few, are visiting the arctic in order to conduct their work.  The University of Alaska has a research station located in Toolik for the purpose of studying global climate changes.  Various research teams have traveled across the arctic to study and to teach a multitude of topics (Mohrwinkle 2004).  Many of these researchers are drawn to the arctic because of concerns about what the future may hold for our planet, and they see changes happening in the arctic as a signal of larger global change.

Future Concerns

Global climate change, global warming, the greenhouse effect, ozone depletion…  Are these the products of the science of fear or part of a valid body of evidence that portends potential global disaster?  An overwhelming majority of scientists studying in fields related to global warming believe that our planet is heating up at an accelerating pace and that a major cause of the increased temperatures stems from human activity.   There has been a 0.66 degree Kelvin linear warming trend per century (Oerlemans 1994) and the effects are manifested in countless ways.  Extensive studies in the arctic have revealed some disturbing news.  The warming trend is melting the permafrost.  The most pronounced signs of trouble emerging show that melting permafrost may destabilize stored methane.  This has been found in the permafrost in continental slope sediments (Bockheim et al. 1999) which includes the woody tundra ecosystem. Since methane is a strong greenhouse gas, this could produce a potential positive feedback that can continue to increase global warming effects.  Permafrost also serves as important storage for carbon.  Warming of the tundra tends to promote the loss of the carbon in the form of CO2 into the atmosphere.  Some evidence has recently been revealed that suggests the tundra system is again acting as a carbon sink due to the capacity for ecosystems to metabolically adjust to long-term changes in climate.  This is a hopeful sign, but the arctic ecosystems are still acting as a net source of CO2 to the atmosphere (Oechel et al. 2000).   An encroachment of more shrub and tree species into the tundra ecosystem has also been observed, occurring especially in sites where the permafrost has melted and the soil has dried out (Lloyd et al. 2002) [Editorial note: The author of this article supplied an incomplete or incorrect reference. --JK].  This can have a significant effect on wildlife populations as it presents a shift in food sources and available habitat.  Although global warming is of great interest for researchers today, there are many other concerns and problems apparent in the woody tundra ecosystem and region.

The lives of the Inupiaq people have changed dramatically over the last century.  They have suffered great losses from disease, suffered at the hand of abusive government policies and corrupt churches, and have struggled to redefine themselves in the modern word while maintaining their cultural values and traditions.  A powerful relationship with the surrounding environment forms the base spiritual beliefs.  This foundation is threatened by depletion of wildlife populations from encroaching civilization and a distinct shift in values.  The deterioration of the primary community value of acting for common good, replaced with the western individualistic perspective can cause a shift in the treatment of the common property, noticed especially in subsistence hunting.  As individual needs become dominant over the needs of the group, common resources can be abused and over used (Howe 2003).  Native people are also facing the challenge of meshing traditional ways of knowing with that of western science, a balance that is difficult to strike.  This is especially true where a general distrust of western society pervades.  This can be seen especially in the area of Native health as it relates to pollution.

Native people are exposed to various pollutants through traditional subsistence diets.  The main cause of concern is the presence of persistent organic pollutants (POP’s) such as DDT, dioxin, PCB’s, and furans that travel to the arctic via winds, ocean currents and other mechanisms (Geo Yearbook 2003).  There is concern among Natives that information on contaminants and pollutants is not being shared, which creates fear and apprehension (Hurwich and Chary 2000).

Another concern pressing in the woody tundra system is the invasion of native species of plant and animals such as Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) transported in cargo containers (USDA 2003) [Editorial note: The reference supplied by the author is unclear.  The editor infers the intended reference is to Bergman et al. --JK] and many other species emerging as new invaders continually.  Meanwhile, budgets in habitat management, wildlife management, and environmental oversight are declining both in the state of Alaska and federally.

One last concern for the future to address here, although there are many more, is the designated status of the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and other sensitive arctic lands, some of which lie within the woody tundra ecosystem.   ANWR cannot be designated wilderness due to its use by Native subsistence hunters (Kauffmann 1993).  The area is currently under great pressure from industry to open it for oil exploration and development, and is likely to forever lose its pristine state.

There is much focus on potential negative outcomes, but it is important to remember that the woody tundra region within the arctic is still a magnificent, largely untouched wilderness that holds immeasurable value.  To conclude on a hopeful note, a quote from President Jimmy Carter, “I hope that all of us can marshal our efforts and inspire American people just to do what’s right…to preserve perhaps the most beautiful place in all the world and that’s the Alaska region.”

By Lorene Lynn
(editorial revision by John Kawula)

References

Soils

Alaska Atlas and Gazetteer. (2000). Yarmouth, ME, DeLorme.

Brady, N. C., and Weil, R. R. (2004). Elements of the Nature and Properties of Soils 2nd ed. Upper Saddle, NJ, Pearson Prentice Hall.

Grasslands and Tundra. (1985). Alexandria, VA, Time Life Books.

Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys (1992) 2nd ed. (Agriculture Handbook no. 436). Washington, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. [On-line] Available from http://soils.usda.gov/technical/classification/taxonomy  13 Oct. 2004.

STATSGO [On-line] Available from http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/products/datasets/statsgo/data/ak.html 13 April 2005.

Walker, D. A., J. G. Bockheim, F. S. Chapin III, W. Eugster, E. F. Nelson and C. L. Ping. 2001. Calcium-rich tundra, wildlife, and the “Mammoth Steppe.” Quaternary Science Reviews. 20: 149-163.

Young, S. B. (1989). To the Arctic: An Introduction to the Far Northern World. NY, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Vegetation

Bowen, S. L. (ed.) (1971). Biogeocoenoses of the Tundra (Biogeotsenozy Tundry). [translated by G. Belkov]. [n.p.], Tundra Biome, International Biological Program.

Circumpolar Arctic Geobotanical Atlas. [n.d.] [On-line] Available from http://www.geobotany.uaf.edu/arcticgeobot/index.html 13 April 2005.

Climate research atlas. [On-line] Available from http://www.arts.monash.edu.au/get/research/climate/atlas/ivotuk_shrub.html 14 Oct. 2004.

Sturm, M., C. Racine and K. Tape. 2001. Increasing shrub abundance in the Arctic. Nature. 411 (no. 6837): 546.

Tyrtikov, A. P. (1976). Effects of Vegetation on the Freezing and Thawing of Soils. New Delhi, Amerind Publishing Co.

Watkins, T. H. (1988). Vanishing Arctic: Alaska’s National Wildlife Refuge. New York, Aperture in association with Wilderness Society.

Current Uses

Alaska. Department of Natural Resources. Division of Oil and Gas. Division Programs. [On-line] Available from http://www.dog.dnr.state.ak.us/oil/programs/programs.htm. 22 April 2005.

Alaska Wilderness Recreation and Tourism Association.  [Home page.]  [Online] Available http://www.awrta.org. 13 April 2005.

Erickson, G. 2004. Lead engineer, Red Dog mine.  Personal interview. June 20, 2004.

Marshall, R. 1970. Alaska Wilderness: Exploring the Central Brooks Range, 2nd ed. Berkeley, University of California Press.

Mohrwinkle, B. 2004. Wilderness guide for Arctic Wild. Personal interview. November 1, 2004.

Murkowski, F. 2004. Murkowski: “We will build the gas pipeline.” Breaking New Trails. Office of the Governor, Anchorage.

Murkowski, F. 2004. Industrial roads key to economic development. Breaking New Trails. Office of the Governor, Anchorage.

Future Concerns

Bergman, D. L., M. D. Chandler, A. Locklear. (No date).  The economic impact of invasive species to wildlife services’ cooperators. USDA Wildlife Service program report under Executive Order 13112. [On-line] Available from http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ws/nwrc/symposia/economics/bergmanHR.pdf 12 Dec. 2004.

Bockheim, J. G., L. R. Everett, K. M. Hinkel, F. E. Melson, P. Brown. 1999. Soil organic carbon storage and distribution in arctic tundra, Barrow, Alaska. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 63:934-940.

Geo Yearbook. 2003. Polar: Atmospheric emissions, environmental pollution, and the impacts of activities associated with the exploitation of natural resources had negative impacts on the Polar Regions. [On-line] Available from http://www.unep.org/geo/yearbook/Englishpdf/Polar.pdf 12 Dec. 2004.

Howe, E. L. 2003. Common Property, Resource Management, and Alaska Native Village Corporations. Presented at the International Association for the study of Common Property. Anchorage, AK. [Online] Available from http://www.alaskaneconomy.uaa.alaska.edu/Publications/anvc_resource_management.pdf  22 April 2005.

Hurwich, E. M. and L. K. Chary. 2000. Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in Alaska: What does science tell us? Circumpolar Conservation Union. [Online] Available from http://www.circumpolar.org/AlaskaPD/report.pdf 12 Dec. 2004.

Kauffmann, J. M. 1993. Alaska's Brooks Range: The Ultimate Mountains. The Mountaineers, Seattle.

Oechel, W. C., G. L. Vourlitis, S. J. Hastings, R. C. Zulueta, L. Hinzman, and D. Kane. 2000. Acclimation of ecosystem CO2 exchange in the Alaskan arctic in response to decadal climate warming. Nature. 406 (no. 6799): 978-981.

Oerlemans, J. 1994.  Quantifying global warming from the retreat of glaciers. Science. 264(5156):243-245.