Opposition Mounts to Potential Thompson Pass Land Exchange
Thompson Pass view. Photo by Allison Sayer.
The Bureau of Land Management received 143 public comments in response to its proposal to alter the East Alaska Resource Management Plan to allow for a land exchange in Thompson Pass (See “Proposed Land Exchange in Thompson Pass” from January 7). The proposal concerns two parcels of land at the “hairpin turn,” which have been identified as potential lands that could be exchanged to the Chugach Alaska Corporation. This initial proposal does not create any transfer of land ownership itself. Instead it would lay the groundwork for a future transfer by making the land eligible for exchange.
Most of the comments regarding the proposal came from Valdez area residents. The overwhelming majority of the comments expressed a wish for the land to remain public due to personal recreation and subsistence activities. Their major concern was being restricted from these activities in the area by private ownership.
A few comments expressed support for the exchange with the provision that an easement be provided to allow the public to pass through. Chugach Alaska Corporation (CAC) Board Chairman Sheri Buretta has affirmed that CAC is “committed” to maintaining public access to the Lowe River through the land in question. A public easement is one of the conditions required for the State of Alaska to be on board with any exchanges.
Some other commenters expressed concerns about environmental degradation as a result of the land becoming open to potential development.
Map showing proposed area to be made available for exchange. Image courtesy of the BLM.
In response to the public comments, Buretta said in a statement, “We understand and respect the opinions of the people in our region and in the Valdez and Glenallen area. It is our desire to be a good neighbor, to seek to understand the opinions of the people in the area and to take a thoughtful approach to utilization of our lands.”
Lesli Ellis Wouters, Alaska BLM Communications Director, said that the BLM has “heard loud and clear that access is a concern” with the public regarding this proposal.
During the initial comment period, City of Valdez City Manager Mark Detter stated that the City had not had time to research and prepare a comment by the January 4 deadline. During the Valdez City Council meeting on January 19 the council members recognized the “extreme interest” of local stakeholders in this issue. BLM Glennallen Field Manager Marnie Graham and BLM Alaska Deputy State Director of Lands and Cadastral Survey Erika Reed were invited to speak and answer questions at that meeting.
Reed and Graham invited the City of Valdez to act as a “cooperating agency” in the BLM planning process going forward. With the unanimous support of the city council and the mayor, Detter agreed to provide staff time and expertise for this. Going forward, City of Valdez staff will be able to participate in meetings to review comments, provide their expertise on local land use, and help determine proposed alternatives.
In the statement referred to earlier, Buretta explained that CAC lobbied for this land exchange as a result of a long history of land decisions. According to Buretta, “Under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971, Alaska Natives were provided the long overdue opportunity to resolve land claims that would finally recognize our historical ties to the lands that provided for our people for thousands of years. However, the land settlement for Chugach was especially challenging due the federal government claiming a large portion of our traditional lands and incorporating them into the Chugach National Forest and Kenai Fjords National Park. This severely restricted the ability for the Chugach to select lands that met the intent of ANCSA – to provide for self-sufficiency for our people.”
Buretta continued, “In 1989 our region was severely impacted by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill which further frustrated land ownership issues for Chugach due to acquisitions of surface estate by the federal and state government using settlement funds from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) settlement payment where Chugach owned the subsurface. This is the premise for the Dingell Act which calls for a Chugach Region Land Study and proposed land exchange.”
The EVOS issue is somewhat convoluted. The initial ANCSA allocations created areas where Tatitlek, Eyak, and Chenega village corporations owned the “surface rights” to the land and CAC owned the “subsurface rights.” Subsurface rights are essentially “mineral rights” and generally refer to access for mining, gravel harvest, etc. Following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, 240,000 acres of village-owned “surface rights” were purchased for conservation and habitat protection, creating a “split estate.” CAC’s subsurface land ownership was rendered less valuable even though they had not participated in the sale. In an earlier conversation, Buretta stated that although the village corporations were characterized as “willing sellers,” the devastation of the oil spill created conditions that forced them to make difficult decisions. The oil spill was also a factor in CAC’s eventual bankruptcy declaration in 1991.
In addition to members of the general public, several organizations have voiced opposition to the proposal. These included The Winter Wildlands Alliance, The Outdoor Alliance, The Alaska Wilderness League, Defenders of Wildlife, the Valdez Adventure Alliance, and the Alaska Outdoor Council. Some of these organizations wrote that the BLM was going above and beyond the requirements of the Dingell Act by seeking to amend the East Alaska Resource Management Plan to allow for exchanges.
According to Graham, amending the plan is needed to fulfill the Dingell Act’s mandate to “identify accessible and economically viable land to be made available for exchange.” She explained that the BLM “does not have a lot of land in the Chugach region,” which meant that the plan had to be amended to find land that meets the necessary criteria.
The East Alaska Resource Management Plan does not currently allow for land exchanges because the “conveyance” process is not yet complete. Not all of the land that has been allocated to different parties by large bills such as ANCSA has been officially conveyed to them by the BLM. Ellis-Wouters explained that land exchanges are much more common in the Lower 48 than they are in Alaska because in Alaska “land patterns haven’t been finalized.” She anticipates that land exchanges will become more common in the future as the remaining acres of land are conveyed throughout the state and land use patterns solidify with finalized ownership.
In the event that the Resource Management Plan is modified to allow for exchanges, and CAC receives the land in question, CAC will relinquish some of its current holdings in the Bremner River watershed, adjacent to Wrangell St Elias National Park and Preserve lands.
The BLM will release a draft assessment during the next few weeks, at which point there will be a public meeting and another 30 day comment period. Following that, a final draft will be issued. This will be followed by a 30 day “protest” period, during which members of the public who have already commented on the plan can make an additional comment.
Article by Allison Sayer