No place like home for Habitat Division

"This system served us well from early statehood until the Murkowski administration some 40-plus years later."

By Myrl Thompson - During Alaska's Constitutional Convention, there was much debate about the importance of natural resource development to the success and sustainability of our future state. E. L. "Bob" Bartlett warned in a speech delivered at that time that development must not be confused with exploitation, and wise administration and oversight of those development activities must occur.

One of many wise decisions to come out of the historic convention that framed our Constitution was a system of appropriate checks and balances in dealing with our natural resources. Bartlett and others knew from experience of Alaska's long history of resource exploitation by Outside interests.

They also debated whether the future state should have only one resource agency or two for the best protection of the people's resources. They realized the need for a balance between renewable and nonrenewable, or finite, resources.

When Alaska did become a state, the first legislature agreed that the protection of Alaska's fish, wildlife and habitat were to be managed by the Department of Fish and Game. They also rightfully placed oil, minerals and the nonrenewable resources under the management of the Department of Natural Resources.

This system served us well from early statehood until the Murkowski administration some 40-plus years later. The state was able to develop a thriving resource industry that was the envy of many other states.

In addition, our renewable resource industries, environment and wildlife, managed by Fish and Game and its habitat division, were second to none.

In one of his earliest acts as governor, Frank Murkowski, through Executive Order No. 107, destroyed the resource protections and balance that Alaska had enjoyed since statehood. By moving the former division of Habitat and Restoration from under Fish and Game and changing it to the Office of Habitat and Permitting under the Department of Natural Resources, Alaskans have suffered a huge disservice.

In former Gov. Murkowski's zeal for nonrenewable resource development, he knowingly upset that delicate balance our founding fathers saw as a necessity. Murkowski's streamlining scheme may have been a boon to the extraction industries, but at what expense?

The extraction industries have been making off-the-chart profits, while the state is just skimming by. At the same time, our fish, wildlife and environment are more at risk than they have been since statehood.

The finite resources will be gone someday, as will the extraction industries themselves, and our children will have nothing left but the renewable resources to make ends meet - providing we adequately protect and preserve them. This is why we have the checks and balances built into our two resource agencies.

The residents of the Mat-Su Valley know first-hand how unresponsive DNR and Habitat were to the people's wishes from the coal-bed methane fiasco a few years back. DNR and Habitat served as an arm of industry, while Alaskans, their wishes and their private property rights took a back seat to the administration and industry plans.

After sitting through a recent committee hearing for House Bill 41, legislation proposed by Rep. Les Gara, D-Anchorage, which would restore the Habitat Division back to Fish and Game, it all came back to me. Those years of feeling like a second-class citizen in my own state raced through my mind.

In this hearing, testifier after testifier expressed support for returning Habitat to Fish and Game. Every commissioner of Fish & Game from statehood to the Murkowski administration is in support of the change.

Department insiders showed great courage in pointing out, on the record, that not all is as well or as wonderful as administrators claim. Basically, no one except DNR administrators themselves believed that the habitat division should be under the yoke of DNR.

It all goes back to balance. We need to protect our renewable resources with utmost diligence. Moving Habitat back is the best way to protect our future, our resources and our children's heritage.

It can be done by either of two ways. The Legislature can make the move happen by passing the Gara bill, or Gov. Sarah Palin can save us a long and drawn-out process by simply undoing what her predecessor did through another executive order.

Gov. Palin has shown courage and determination in past reversals of Murkowski policies and has worked for what is in the best interest of Alaskans. If she takes the time to listen to Alaskans on this issue, she will understand what many of us already know: It is once again time to protect us and our children's future and heritage.

It is time not only to take a stand, but also to make a move.

First published February 17, 2007 by the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman

Myrl Thompson is a veteran Capitol watcher, former candidate for state House, and award-winning free-lance journalist based in Wasilla, Alaska.

© AlaskaReport News