Alaska’s Citizen’s Advisory Commission on Federal Areas points to existing land agreements and the Endangered Species Act as its reason to oppose proposed Sealaska lands legislation.
The Commission was initially created a year after the 1980 passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. It helped Alaskans navigate ANILCA’s rules and regulations.
Re-established in 2007, the commission “is responsible for identifying and reducing potential negative impacts on Alaska and its citizens from federal actions on any of the 239 million acres of federal land in the state,” according to the Commission’s website. It is made up of six Alaskans appointed by the governor, two legislators and two other citizens.
Stan Leaphart, CACFA executive director, said the Commission met with Sealaska several times since 2009. He said Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s recent lands bills have improved from earlier versions, including the addition of some Commission recommendations such as access across lands.
“Some changes we were happy to see,” Leaphart said.
However, Leaphart said the bill did not go far enough.
“We felt the existing selections that Sealaska had — some people refer to them as boxes — were adequate to fulfill Sealaska’s land requirements,” Leaphart said. “If they were allowed to select land in new areas it can be cause for concern.”
That concern includes possibly triggering the Endangered Species Act protections for the Alexander Archipelago wolf.
Current Sealaska land bills — Murkowski’s Senate Bill 730, titled “Southeast Alaska Native Land Entitlement Finalization and Jobs Protection Act” and Rep. Don Young’s House Resolution 1408, titled “Southeast Alaska Land Entitlement Finalization and Jobs Protection Act” — allow the corporation to select land outside traditional Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act boundaries. Leaphart said the Forest Service was concerned loss of additional timber land would upset its program to supply timber to local mills.
“Sealaska’s business is to harvest for the export of round logs,” Leaphart said. Transfer of these lands “might further jeopardize an industry that is on the ropes,” Leaphart said.
Leaphart said the Commission supports Sealaska Corp. getting its lands.
“We will take another look if they make changes to the bill,” he said.
The act is in the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, on which Sen. Murkowski is the ranking minority member. Committee spokesman Robert Dillon said CACFA reported on an old version of the bill.
“We believe the comments don’t reflect the current version of the bill. Some (of CACFA’s complaints) have been adjusted and some are being worked on,” Dillon said.
Sealaska Corp. is “disappointed” with Citizen’s Advisory’s report, said Executive Vice President Rick Harris. Harris said he also believes Citizen’s Advisory may have used outdated information.
“We have concerns that the representation on CACFA is not current in regard to the issues affecting Southeast and the legislative adjustments,” Harris said.
The letter correctly recognizes that Sealaska has existing selection rights and it could complete its selections from inside the withdrawals, he said. However, the existing selection areas include numerous sensitive areas, Harris said.
Harris calls Citizen’s Advisory’s Endangered Species Act claims “erroneous.”
“We have supplemental reports that suggest that with the modified selection patterns we can avoid the issues suggested in the letter,” Harris said.
Though Sealaska does export round logs, Harris said the company also sells to local mills.
“Sealaska has a continuing micro sale program in which we sell wood to small mills,” Harris said.
• Contact reporter Russell Stigall at 523-2276 or at russell.stigall@juneauempire.com.
Comments (24)
Add commentThis bill stinks, but...
“Sealaska’s business is to harvest for the export of round logs,” Leaphart said. Transfer of these lands “might further jeopardize an industry that is on the ropes,”
The problem with that argument is that a lot of the timber from Forest Service sales is being exported as round logs too. Tough to beat up Sealaska when the rest of the timber industry is doing the same thing.
kill this bill
“We felt the existing selections that Sealaska had — some people refer to them as boxes — were adequate to fulfill Sealaska’s land requirements,” Leaphart said. “If they were allowed to select land in new areas it can be cause for concern.”
That says it all right there.
But Sealaska got greedy and wanted to alter the original agreement.
There are more things wrong with this "land for votes" legislation than is right with it.
This bill needs to go belly up. Sealaska needs to shut up and stick to the original ANCSA agreement, and all this would go away forever.
But they won't.
you can't polish a terd
Call it the "Jobs protection act" or the "saving the human race act" or any other bow you want to put on this package, but it remains the same corrupt legislation that it is.
This is a "land for votes-quid pro quo act" or better yet, "we've changed our minds and want better lands act" might be more appropriate.
There are more things wrong with this legislation than are right with it. It needs to go belly up.
Sorry if this is redundant, but my previous post is 'awaiting moderation' censorship.
this legislation still
this legislation still targets sensitive karst lands , important to fisheries and sensitive to logging destruction. It may provide a couple hundred jobs in timber development, but potentially hurts thousands of jobs in the fishing industry and tourism. Also Don Young's version before the House is still the old bill which targets even more sensitive karst lands and watersheds.
I am sure that this Commission did not base it's findings on old information. If Sealaskas Bill is still a work in progress it has no business being included in a lands bill
Sealaska / Murkowski spin machine never stops
CACFA gave Sealaska inordinate amounts of time to make presentations (dog and pony shows) and give testimony. At the last meeting they teleconferenced in Murkowski's staff and let them ramble.
CACFA has some of the most astute resource annalists in the state and access to resource people in all agencies. They aren't making any mistakes. And as to Murkowski / Sealaska claim that they're working with old material - what bunk !
Murkowski hid versions of revisions of the bill from the very people effected most last year - just releasing copies to a few SELECT people. Folks that were living out in the communities most threatened by this bill were getting their copies third hand. For Murkowski / Sealaska to now point at some unknown 'revision' as a defense doesn't pass the straight face test.
CACFA gave Murkowski staff plenty of call in air time - this is a very competent and fair group. One thing not mentioned in the article was the findings that the over all access provisions were not workable because of reliance on methodologies that have failed in the interior.
This bill is horrible for anyone who cares about wildlife and public access to use and enjoy SE Alaska lands.
Murkowski needs to drop this misguided venture and apologize to the citizens of southeast.
AK Citizens Advisory Com., "open house on Prince of Wales"
It's time for the AK Citizens Advisory Commission to have one of their "Open House" and meetings on Prince of Wales Island, and take some public comment from the citizens they are supposedly representing on this 'opinion'. Afterall, they do rotate their meetings around the state of Alaska.
Not having their meeting here on Prince of Wales is just as bad as having a meeting 'to move the Capital to Juneau' only in Anchorage. Why have it in Juneau, that's not where Alaska's population base is would be the justification in this case, and it costs too much to travel to Juneau. BUT, it has a direct economic impact on my Juneau neighbors, so rightfully such a meeting would occur there as well.
In Prince of Wales residents case, we've now had 20 percent of our people move away for work. In August, while the rest of the state had an unemployment rate of 7.7 percent, Prince of Wales' unemployment rate was 12.4 percent, AT THE PEAK OF TOURISM AND FISHERIES.
Support for more second growth selections (this bill) is because in turn old growth is protected for this wolf. So this is NOT adding up for this group to NOT support the protection from old growth selections this bill provides.
This group is responsible for "reducing potential negative impacts on AK and it's citizens", yet it's impacting jobs for my home island. Again, I say, have your meeting here and take in public comment from the AK residents you're representing on this one.
Rick Harris and the ESA
The CAFCA is quite right to be concerned about potential ESA listings. Rick Harris knows quite well that the corporate land selections will implicate the Endangered Species Act. There are two petitions under review as we speak for the wolf and for the flying squirrel that emphasize areas selected for Rick's corporate clearcuts.
Senator Murkowski's conservation areas which are supposedly meant to offset impacts to fish and wildlife are meaningless. These so-called watershed scale protections are in areas that are not at risk from logging, mining or road construction and many of them are already protected under the roadless rule. Harris is wrong in pressing forward with the notion that you can offset complete habitat destruction in one area with legislated "salmon forests" in another. Such measures will do nothing to derail the ESA process. The only way to do that is to stop old growth logging and associated road construction on the Tongass.
What is also particularly telling here is that Harris and his cohorts are perfectly willing to play Russian roulette with the endangered species act. The willingness to bring species to the brink of extinction makes clear that all the spin about a timber industry transition to more responsible logging is just that - spin. It also will require state and national taxpayers to foot the bill for dealing with the listing petitions.
Like the legislation itself, another wasteful federal subsidy for taking public forests away.
Great quote
"If they were allowed to select land in new areas it can be cause for concern." Do ya think? I like the idea of throwing the endangered species act at them.
CACFA is being polite......
Kookesh in Craig found guilty of ethics violation. Bill Thomas fined $4000 for violating election laws. Opposition from every scientific organization known. 8(a) contracts under investigation by Federal authorities. National Native Organizations opposed to Sealaska Managements attempt to make Sealaska a tribe. The video "Hoonah's Legacy" kicking the original Sealaska bill to the curb.
The video "Fate of the Tongass" where Sealaska's ex CEO warns Native people to leave the Tongass off any balance sheet. Marlene Johnson Sealaska's ex board chairperson grabbing up fliers that oppose Sealaska's management and the Sealaska bill at the AFN Convention.
No term limits, discretionary voting, buying proxies, on and on and on. Enough!
Enough...........
Sorry about double posting but The Empire has a glitch in their system.
Mr. Stigall's assignment
Mr. Stigall must have been given the assignment to write an article undermining the Citizen's Advisory Commission on Federal Areas and promoting Sealaska's attempted land grab. Otherwise, why didn't he cite the other opinions the Commission took into consideration when making its decision to oppose S. 730 and H.R. 1408? There are other parties involved, other Alaskans who would be effected - like anyone who uses or might like to use in the future Tongass National Forest lands Sealaska Corporation is trying to get. Why was no one from the U. S. Forest Service interviewed? It's complete speculation on the part of Robert Dillon that the Commission wasn't considering the current version of the bill. S. 730 being "adjusted" and "worked on" doesn't change the Commission's conclusion that "We have determined that entitlement can be met with the currently selected lands in the existing withdrawals. Neither S. 730 nor H.R. 1408 will accomplish this in a manner that is fair and equitable to all of the residents and communities who depend on the resources of the Tongass National Forest."
As a Sealaska Shareholder, I
As a Sealaska Shareholder, I never liked the idea selling our timber in the round because we to cheap to build a sawmill to create a lot of jobs for shareholders and non shareholders to have in their communities. I still think that today.
Sealaska would have a easier time for land selection if it were going to the four Landless Villages to create Village Corporations and create economic develop to happen in there towns in Southeast.
Sealaska Corporation are not smart enough to think of that. By the way, Sealaska Corporation is NOT a Tribe, nor do they represent me, Clan nor Tribe. They really don't take care of their Shareholders very well anyway...Just themselves. You have to be blind not to see that...my opinion only.
Outdated practices
Lat58 hit it on the head. A lot of FS timber sales are designed to continue the old boom and bust clearcut model, keep a fraction of the lumber in SE, and export the rest to Washington or Asia in the round. Sealaska is exempt from important federal management practices, though, and their cuts are more severe than federal land cuts. Here's a youtube video to demonstrate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRQre80IVj4&noredirect=1
Mr. Dillon and Mr. Harris are
Mr. Dillon and Mr. Harris are both trying to throw doubt on this Commissions report. Insinuating they don't know the real facts after spending 2 years looking into it, because they don't like the conclusion reached by CACFA which backs up what those opposed to this legislation have been saying all along. I agree it almost seems that this piece was written just to give Sealaska the opportunity to cause doubt of this groups credibility. Why else was no one else given an opportunity to comment.
Harris also states that the
Harris also states that the groups Endangered species claims are erroneous because " we have supplemental reports that "suggest" that with modified selection patterns we can avoid the issue". This does not make those claims erroneous, it is wish full thinking on Sealaskas part that this will not happen. Reports that "suggest" something is far from a certainty.
request for update from the Advisory Commission
I hope there will be another response to the latest land bill, instead of the commissions response to an older version of the bill.
I also hope this Advisory Commission will have their meeting about the lands bill on Prince of Wales Island, to receive public comment from us who are most impacted by this bill. Afterall, they do rotate their meeting location and receive public comment from the AK citizens they represent. To not bring the meeting to Prince of Wales makes as much sense as NOT having a meeting about moving the states capitol in Juneau.
Economically, my home island has suffered long enough by holding our natural resource hostage from resolving our high unemployment rates/ economic down turn. In August, the state of Alaska unemployment rate was 7.7 percent, while Prince of Wales Island's unemployment rate was 12.4 percent. While we have tourism and commercial and sports fishing, it could not take care of the economic downturn locking up our rainforest harvesting. This has caused 20 percent of our population to move away from the home and family for work.
Thank you to the thousands of supporters to help us. We don't want government handouts like heat assistance and unemployment checks, food stamps, instead....work. Land transfer for work for us. gunal chéesh, yak'ei awe.
why not by the forest service?
I can't support TLUMP management by the forest service because as a tax payer I can't afford it. I urge you to go to the forest service website about how much it costs the tax payer in court costs vs. the environmentalists. As a tax payer I cannot and should not afford or even consider this avenue. At that exorbant cost, it's no longer about saw mills verses round log exports. There is no affording the forest service.
If the Advisory Commission was responding to the most recent bill, there would not be concerns about the wolf. The old growth harvesting is what 'this concern' wanted removed from the selections. The current bill has more second growth selections in lieu of old growth.
No other ANCSA corporation had to select 'within the boxes', only Sealaska due to the many sawmill contracts in place at the original time of selection. These contracts are no longer, so the boxes ARE IRRELEVANT. As with all the regional ANCSA corporations, no more boxes.
AK Citizens Advisory Commission, next time you have this topic on your agenda, bring that meeting to Prince of Wales Island.
What was settled as far as
What was settled as far as the wolf by this new bill's boundary ?
They are still taking Old Growth Reserves, What makes you think they were not responding to the new versions of the bill? As a so called work - in - progress, this legislation has no business being modified behind closed doors, then put in a lands bill without more further public participation. Why are the communities most impacted by this legislation being kept in the dark about the behind closed door conniving as if we are not impacted the most by all of this? This commissions report also showed that the timber industry ( not including Sealaska ) would be negatively impacted by this legislation. Loss of JOBS outside Sealaska's timber opperations.
More people should actually read the CACFA letter
Rather then this wind and BS from Sealaska and Murkowski.
CACFA did a great job and were very fair. Sealaska seems to have adopted a ' just say anything ' - anything - approach to this bill. Evidently their strategy is that most people wont go and check the facts and if they repeat things enough people will be dummies and give their position credence.
Very disturbing condescending strategy.
I'm glad most people on the street see though it and don't go along with a few top officers divisive and selfish agendas.
To Aankadaxtseen Re: Landless communities
A friendly correction, there are five Landless communities. Haines, Tenakee, Petersburg, Wrangell, & Ketchikan.
(I am a Landless Shareholder, I am without roots, like a tree yanked out of the earth and left lying with no connection to my ancestoral origins. I find it an insult to be referred to as an "at-large shareholder", a label that only reinforces the feeling of no origins.)
I didn't know Haines was a
I didn't know Haines was a village? I was on the original Landless Community with Ray Roberts in Ketchikan. Haines was never mentioned, just Ketchikan, Petersburg, Wrangell and Tenakee Springs.
What Clan Houses there before Haines? Its a question.
and then, I stand corrected for now.
Quote: CACFA
....conflicting claims about whether the original withdraw areas contain sufficient timber to sustain Sealaska's timber program could not be confirmed because there are no publicly available timber appraisals. Comparative economic data are also unavailable.
gramaraven, yep I feel your
gramaraven,
yep I feel your pain. We are on the gumboot boat together. I am Gaanax adi Clan - Raven House/Drift to Shore House. Gaanax adi Clan is the oldest Clan in the Tlingit Nation. One would think we would at the very least have Village Corporation status? Sealaska Corporation is showing no respect and turn their heads on the Taan ta Kwaan.
Main reason is we didn't have any representation in the early days of A.N.L.C.S.A. was determined.
Never to late to fix the oversight by everybody. We need land base for our tribal survival, like you. Keep up the pressure.
It's still our land regardless what the brainwashed Society says. We never gave it up nor signed anything.
KILL THE BILL!
Sealaska pick your lands from the original agreement, period. Let's move on...