Talk of Alaska; Monthly Call-In Show with the Governor

I think there is a problem and people ought to be be aware of it it's it's under the guise of informational signs but there's going to be a problem with it and I think we need to always be vigilant against protecting one of our uniqueness as of being in Alaska. You don't like billboards media. No sir. It's pretty blunt. No no no no wavering on that answer at all is there. We do need to give information to to motorists and in terms of points of interest facilities that are available. But it should not be that should not be used as a as a camouflage for advertising in a way that really does diminish part of the attraction and allure and the value of living in Alaska. Let's go back to the phones. Our next caller is from Homer. Good morning you're on the air. Good morning. Thanks for taking my call. Thanks Governor for being on the show and thank goodness Public Radio is still around to bring us shows like this. I wanted to talk about the Alaska Film Office. I'm rather concerned

that it's slated for virtual limitation in the governor's budget. The billboard itself I suppose we could live without. I think it brings us high visibility which is probably a good thing and probably no one notices. Another billboard in Los Angeles other than the fact that this one's of something beautiful like Alaska. My main concern though is that we need to diversify our source of revenue up here and in Alaska we need to bring clean sources of revenue up here. And if I understand correctly the Alaska film office costs about two hundred sixty thousand dollars and generated revenue of around three million dollars for Alaska businesses last year. Sounds like a pretty good return on our investment to me. I'm really concerned that

this office is richly slated for destruction elimination you know rendered completely ineffective because if I wanted to make a movie in Alaska I would need to contact I would need to be able to call someone and say where do I go to get this how do I get that. I need a person to talk to to set it up for me and it's an industry that is virtually nonpolluting. There's really nothing wrong with it it doesn't generate a lot of. Chemical in the water and stuff like that. I wonder why it's being eliminated. OK. Actually it isn't and to the caller you're absolutely right when you describe what the purpose of the film office is and that is to give out information to be one stop opportunity for people who are interested

in doing business here for getting information and also for a den of fine potential people who would want to do business and may not know how good Alaska is. But we need to do in marketing Alaska regarding the film office that is the same that we have done in terms of less monies but more efficient message with marketing Alaska. Debbie said the assistant commissioner of Commerce consolidated the offices of tourism international trade and economic development really into into one office because they all do speak to each other and we are still maintaining a film staff person. We still do have a budget but we had to eliminate a position and really I considered it inefficiency and consolidation in a way that we can help strengthen the message. We are also going to be bringing in the private sector the people in Alaska who deliver the services that a film company would use up here. They certainly have a stake in promoting it so we're going to get them to pitch

in and participate in. It's just a public private partnership thinking smarter spending less money getting a better message. So I would look to it as a as a moving moving forward in the right kind of way as opposed to eliminating something we're we're we're big on films in Alaska. Even if Steven Seagal sometimes does miss the point on some of his some of his issues. Our next caller is from Fairbanks. Good morning you're on the air. Good morning. Yeah you're on the air go ahead. Hi my name is Joel Cooper and I'm I'm actually a resident. I'm presently and Perry Bacon. And when you do address some concerns I have about cooking that watershed and the impact that oil and gas leases 149 stately silly. And the issuance of the MTBF permit for shore oil development. I've worked to see that just for the past five years and

have a lot of concerns what impact that's all going to have on the techs in the Bay Area and Chizik and counting. And one of my one of my concerns is that recent or not recent but back in December December 6 at the Kenai watershed for me I asked Jim Hansen a division of oil and gas what the setbacks would be from on lease sale 85 tracks with the setbacks would be for development around the colonies and Mr. Hansen said that they'd be using lease sale 1:49 waters. Well at that time we still 149 wasn't even made a decision on yet and you oppose at least sale which obviously can have a major impact in the lower and barren island counties. And I just wanted to know did you know when you look at

the division of oil and gas. I knew that they needed it at least at 1:49 water to drill it for the 85 8 tracks. Joe I don't think I quite understand your question let me maybe respond to it in the sense that Lee sailed one forty nine which is the federal lease sale for lower Cook Inlet and 85 a certainly had a relationship with each other. What we did oppose in a and I opposed lease sale 149 specifically in drilling off shore south of Ninilchik I think that the all of the the values and the environmental issues at stake. It could be avoided by drilling through directional drilling on shore and that there we need not expose the risk to the to the benefits that it would bring in terms of offshore drilling. We have given some very clear direction that the

the water fowl the fish resources all of the habitat in regards to 85 they be very strictly adhered to. We for instance in the initial work of it and this is where the process we're going through now of having a stakeholders meeting to iron out specific problems with areas that were successfully built upon such as the Kenai River where there was not enough setback that we're going to make sure that it has an adequate set back so that all of the resources that you speak to if there was any you know if it did if it was not adequately met in the process prior to the lease sale that we do have this period of the stakeholders meetings in addition to the individual permitted mitigation measures that we can address so I feel very comfortable that with 85 a we can do it I was uncomfortable with the fact that the feds allowed their offshore drilling

farther south than I felt was reasonable but we will we will work with them. Our next caller is from Anchorage. Yes you're on the air go ahead. Good morning governor and also this is a blanket I think you probably know me better if you know the morning that I'm back to my traditionally aimed at my father grandfather gave me so be known from now on it's a function you know when I when I've been reading up but this is his I'm going full time now but when I'm reading about this he said but this Indian Country stuff and the things that are said about different things. I worked as you know about 25 years with the different tissues for the protection of the land or for kicks of the rights of our people. In effect at both dealing with the federal government and some private sectors

in a way what I'd like to see is that one of the things that being said is exactly why a lot of the fillets are making a stand and persist in the order they want to be because over the course of history you know research which many a lot of native people have been involved in plus some contributions by some native people to this information that were not after us created that today constitute an assent to Stevens was involved as the young lawyer. Native people who were left from voting and and their research showed that the potential reason is that you know it's a fairly good into it to distance was first written in Russia that they weren't telling

they couldn't sew title to the unit that left because the tribes on it because it had been its own religious system and their own government and for that reason they couldn't have a title under into it. That that made them legal title holder. And then anyway and so also creasing of a lot of money in the village that were formed illegally because they didn't follow their own regulations. And as far as the protests and have been to to create in the public and also OK Charlie Charlie me just ask this the time the time frame here is the point in let me just ask your question is that there have been mistreatment of natives and natives as tribes also in the past. And the idea here of all of this argument

is justifying correcting some of that is that is that the question really to the governor here. I think that if I'm speaking to the governor I need to lay the groundwork for my question because I think it's important that people know that. And you know he just asked you to think you can go ahead in any way. In my village the way it was created that they didn't do that process what they did was walk around in the village and had people sign in and that they promised the money that this would be a vehicle for bringing money to the community. And ever since then they have been forcing. One of the things that I consider to be in reference to Harrison's statement that part of breaking the US Constitution the Constitution and also some of the laws that you know that have caused an international level in reference to the genocide and presidents.

But anyway Kristen is with the governor with this background and and you know this I the things that we know that he was recorded done on film how hurted Cole who's been considered for legal counsel directed it to be directed to a committee which was recorded on tape. And Peter Beattie picked up power from the village and so on. And there's other things like. There was a SWAT team sent to a village just because somebody's got a moose for their for their home. Now this is why a lot of our village just are doing what they're doing. I'll call it some kinds of b.s. he said and their right think because somebody has taken the control of the village and they're making decisions in June in Washington D.C. And you know in Anchorage.

OK Charlie real quick is there is the question that is that the question is what it is. I'm going have to interrupt you I'm sorry. Good news for the governor. Go ahead. How can how can they or are you as the governor continue to foresee that very just have been very destructive events there are destructive to the way our of our people that destroys our language our culture our science and death than even our ceremonies. How can you keep pushing these things when you know that these things are happening out in the village and it's destroying our going to know about what I believe. You're in regards to your question. First of all the legal issues are something that the Supreme Court is taking a look at in and neither you or I can definitively say whether that is were nation of laws and it's the Supreme Court that will determine as to what actions of the past were legal or not in regards to the day to day life every

single day I want to make sure that that there are job opportunities and hope and education in from the smallest village to the biggest urban area. And that's the way I believe that we can best allow people the opportunities and choice in their lives to pursue their own individual goals whether as a family or as a tribe or as as a community. So that's that's where we are. You know let me ask an update question on another subject if I may. You met a few weeks ago with the CEO of Louisiana Pacific Mark Seal and came to you know spoke with you concerning the future of Southeast timber industry. And I guess the main thing there was that there have been anticipations for an awfully long time now some sort of an agreement between Louisiana Pacific involving kitschy can't pull sawmills now and the Forest Service. Is there an agreement is this thing ready to go ahead you get any sort of

an update on the actual condition there. We did not. There are two issues involved in the agreement. One is the contractual we mean aeration the Louisiana Pacific. Is it tempting to negotiate with the federal government. And that's an issue that I know nothing about nor is that an issue that the state would be involved in. The other issue is whether there will be adequate timber supply for the two solid mills to be operating. That depends on something that I feel that the federal government is long overdue in coming up with the tongs Laney's management plan. Determination of what the allowable sale quantity is going to be. We need to know that it should have been done last summer. We need we need to know that within that context we will be able to see if there is if there is enough for the operation of the sawmills I feel confident that there is an adequate amount that should allow for that.

I encourage the federal government to make whatever accommodations are necessary. As I understand that there was some type of agreement I think Senator Murkowski was one announcing that there was some kind of agree with it while up to three years supply for those sawmills and then they would compete like anyone else some of the quantity there can be a viable timber industry in Southeast Alaska if people would quit playing politics over it. And I think the federal government has a responsibility to come out with good science and good management. What the allowable sale quantity is. And that's where we have to start from. I hope the negotiations are successful there was no I was not led to believe that there's any major problem and they need to for the sake of the families and kids you can dance around in communities need to come to a closure on them. Are we anticipating everything coming out as one big package in other words the plan is coming out with an agreement is that what you're expecting.

It doesn't have to be that way they could come out I believe a living arrangement and understood a few weeks ago it was supposedly imminent and then we nobody's heard anything of itself and those negotiations are between those two parties so it can't come out and there certainly is enough timber to allow for that accommodation so that we can move forward. Certainly though I want to keep the pressure of federal government and we keep asking I talked recently with Secretary Glickman and he showed me that it was forthcoming in the regional for sure so it was forthcoming but we still don't have an answer on. We've got time for probably one more phone call let's go to Barrow. Good morning. Well good morning you're on the air go ahead. I just got two minutes. Good morning governor just a couple points. Yes or when people keep referring to answer the North Slope people were the only tribe to vote against the native disturbs or different tribes who are not representing us. For

an international level you don't see the French people voting on behalf of the Spanish people in Spain. Somehow this is not right. If funds are allocated to stop rival status we need to revisit the language in the United States bottle Aska from Russia and see where the boundaries are really. Another point when you see the state and the legislation who introduced Senate bill 36 concrete contrary to the pleas of the state constitution in cutting education funding from the children of the north. And on top of that. Yeah like you do to pull me down from the North Slope to their urban areas. It's easy to write because it takes money and food away from the mouth of our children. We're not here to hunt for food. Our people on the North Slope or just generally a generation away from hunger and starvation. Well let me maybe if I might comment to that number one I'm glad I'm not a lawyer. Exploration and discovery and start fighting for our cause we do not see

state money stepping that's in the future. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer all of the constitutional questions that are going to evolve from this issue that we're discussing and there are some important ones are going to be decided by the Supreme Court and I believe that all perspectives are adequately represented probably more than adequately represented. The second part of it though and regarding to the foundation for me which is what I think you're referring to I came forward last week with a bill which I believe for the first time in a decade. Change is the way in which we distribute money to schools. It will be more fair. It will be understandable and it gives incentives to achieving standards. And I think that in this kind of a rewrite that is the only way that we can move education forward to get the confidence of the public. I disagree strongly with the bill that you did mention that just takes money from one area without a basis of fairness or understandability or anything else other than taking money. And I think that's what makes people discouraged

about politics when they don't see the the thought in the process of the direction behind it that's why I'm hoping that the foundation formula that the State Board of Education after long extensive hearings throughout the state with good representation came forward with and I had the pleasure of presenting as the way in which we should move forward and that I hope it does. You were speaking about the lawyers are going to have to have to settle an awful lot of things. I understand that Attorney General Patel is going to Washington next week some court cases that are going on down there but also he's supposed to be we're anticipating that he might be having some meetings with the administration particularly over our as 20 477 and maybe even a cover up couple of other of these issues are you. Are you able to tell us some of some of what's going on within. Absolutely. There was unbe notes to the state of Alaska. I feel a significant change in the policy of the Department of Interior over 2 4 7 7 which basically is the right of ways that

Alaska head across federal lands all the way up until 1976. And there are some really important right away so that Alaskans have used over the years to get access and. And as we all know living in Alaska access is the key. These are done with full considerate consideration of private property rights of important recreational and conservation values but these are important access for the economy and just for the movement of people in services and goods. The the Department of Interior change that without discussing with the state. I consider that a real violation of trust in a relationship. And legally they are for good produce and for Congress. We're going to take a case. To them we'll take we're prepared to take it to court. We'll work with the congressional delegation to really stop what I consider a high handed approach. So we can expect maybe the attorney general can get some of some of the stuff at least

started there in Washington yes or were given a list thank you very much for being with us today. I'm afraid that we are just about out of time here and we look forward to I think reschedule for the 18th of next month also for four weeks from today so I look forward to seeing you that also this are appreciated and will here with and I think the couplings will also have an open door meeting so another bite at the apple. OK that's all the time thank you for listening to our program today was produced a k t o f and then Juno by John Greeley engineered by Jeff Brown and put it on the air with the help of a lot of people who work for K2 for the Alaska Public Radio Network. I'm Dave Donaldson that day. Talk of Alaska is made possible today by AT&T Alaska your crew

choice and by the 30 member stations of the Alaska Public Radio Network. This program is a production of AP already which is solely responsible for its content use expressed on this program or those of the participants and are not necessarily those of a PR ran this station or its underwriters. Your business or organization can communicate to Alaskans in more than 330 cities and villages throughout the state to find out how. Call 1 800 7 5 2 8 p r n.. This is a PR read the Alaska Public Radio Network. Oh. Three minutes five seconds. The U.S. Naval Observatory

master clock at the tone Eastern Standard Time 14 hours three minutes 15 seconds you have 19 hours three minutes 20 seconds. U.S. Naval Observatory master clock at the tone Eastern Standard Time 14 hours three minutes 30 seconds. Universal Time 19 hours three minutes 35 seconds. US Naval Observatory for Mill year in getting the Supreme Court to hear cases and also to pay if they heard it to the conclusion of the of the argument given that the legislature has suggested another $500000 for legal counsel. Now the state is the only party that has standing with the legislature would like to have additional counsel I guess to themselves and for some other fairly vague reasons

to add at least their their strength to the argument. And I think that's fine. I want to make it very clear if we have I have had discussions with the president and the speaker that any activity outside of the legal challenge might well. Undermine our case before the Supreme Court. So any effort that we take I think should be directed at purely the legal effort. Once there has been a finality through a Supreme Court decision either to not hear the case or to make a decision on it then I think there might well be a very good public purpose in bringing Alaskans together to discuss what the next step is. And there will be a wide variety of opinions. The congressional delegation needs to be brought in on it. Obviously the administration and the legislature and many of the people that have a wide diversity of opinion through some type of education process as to how we can hopefully come up with

a unified position. But that should only take place after the case is done and I've sent a letter to the speaker and to the president confirming our conversations on this and hopefully that there will be some understanding that that is the direction this this public process actually. There are the congressional delegation is due in town today. Indeed you know here meetings with FEMA and some regional corporations that I love starting Also at that time we went on the air here. To start that process and it is just premature for them to be determining what steps need to be made or are there other efforts that are being taken somewhere to say maybe there is time to get some natives into some villages of authority. I have I have met with the congressional delegation and the purpose of the meetings that will be taking place between the delegation I believe it's individually and in AFN board of directors and they

are in a broad segment of native Alaskans. I think it is more of a listening opportunity for the delegation. I've been invited tomorrow to listen to some of their concerns I think that they are in an exploratory mode of learning about what the case might mean to them so that's where the issue is there's not going to be any discussion and we do have the full support of the delegation that the state's position in front of the Supreme Court needs to be pursued that it should not. We should not have any discussions on the side about what if intel that we have gone through that process. Let's go to the phones 1 800 4 7 8 8 2 5 5. That's 1 800 4 7 8 talk. And our first caller is from Jacqueline. Good morning you're on the air. Good morning Governor and all. My name is Gary hare and I'm the chief from chicle own village. Hi Gary.

You know before and I do you to work on a government to government basis long before you were a governor and ever since you became governor. And I think that a million dollars you guys are raising to fight the Indian Country issue which basically is declaring war on Indians. I think that it would go a long ways in and producing if you used for the opposite to work with the Indians it would go a long ways because you need to look at what's happening in the international arena with human rights. And also you need to look at a few other of the agreements which you took an oath you swore an oath to uphold and one of them is a constitution of the state of Alaska. One of them is the Constitution of the state of the United States. And if you look at a lot of these things you'll understand that you're not only going against the laws which you said you're going to uphold but you're also creating genocide on indigenous people of this land.

Get it. I'm not sure if that was a question or not but maybe just as a response Kerry would say and we have talked about this before and you are a very ardent advocate of of one side of the issue. I can clearly see my. My role in uploading the state's constitution is something that every single day I try and do to my utmost. I think really there's sometimes two issues that need to be discussed one is the legal question that is now in front of the Supreme Court or we're preparing a case to to appeal to that that has a lot to do with interpretation of the federal law. The other issue sometimes. More important in many ways and something that shouldn't be forgotten is the day to day relationships between communities and villages and local governments in the state the federal government on how we can promote jobs and

education and those are the two issues that I think are the most important in achieving what the native commission a couple of years ago came out and said were important and that is self-reliance self-dependence and preservation of the integrity of native culture and having a job and hope an opportunity having a good education. To me is the essence of those along with resolving the subsistence issue which is in many ways the largest employer in rural Alaska. That is if you count a job as being putting food on the table for yourself and your family so if we can resolve those important day to day issues of the people's lives and there's a lot of reasons why we need to change directions and all of those areas to be able to assure that in the future I think that sometimes is more worthwhile than the whole gaggle of lawyers that get hired to do other issues. Those are important and we need to pay attention to them but let's not forget the other the the real people on a day to day basis.

Let me interject another question here and following up on that. There was a round table over the weekend finished yesterday with recap it sponsored it concerning subsistence. You spoke to them by telephone yesterday as I recall. As I understand their final report is that they pretty much decided they don't want state management they would prefer to at least hold out for federal management and meanwhile we can't get the legislature to her you have not got the legislature yet to approve a constitutional amendment that would have state management. Is their argument carry a little more weight perhaps just in the light of the political situation as we're see it now. I think you know I've been advised by many elders as I've traveled throughout rural Alaska to be very careful about embracing federal control of Fish and Game. Certainly the mismanagement of fisheries by the feds was the driving force behind statehood. I don't think there's any question that the calling the rules from a far away place on what takes

place with the most important I mean day to day life saving or life giving resources is some something that you want to give to someone else. Haphazardly federal control I believe is wrong for Alaska. I think state authority over fish and game so that we can manage the resource for the sustainable yield to provide for Alaskans and understanding that there is a special need for subsistence in rural Alaska is the right direction for us to take. We have made an enormous amount of progress on the day to day basis of working with villages and communities to help provide subsistence food. We have done it through I believe the appointment of a subsistence director in the Department of Fish and Game very Pete who's had a long understanding and and she has lived it as well as an academic in management background in this area the entire department is geared toward our board of fish and board of game. I think you've done an outstanding job in understanding the needs of the

Morial at potlatch Moose the Round Island walrus to work out with the federal government the Migratory Bird Treaty all of these are whole new directions which give on the day to day life. I think a new opportunity for rural Alaska to connect with a resource. We have done more code management looking in and gathering upon the experience and the expertise of rural individuals and. Communities and villages to utilize their expertise in helping manage the resource in a way better that I think it has ever been. So I think there's some real success in state management. When I look upon some of the positions like was taken by rural cap is a very understandable negotiating position but not one that in any way contradicts the direction that we're taking. Let's go back to the phones our caller is from Homer. Good morning you're on the air. No. Maybe you're not on the air. It's Try again Homer.

Good morning. No let's go to the let's go to Goodwood. Let's try our next caller good when you're on the air. Yeah yeah you hear me there. Hear you fine go ahead or not. That was kind of concerned about the money that we're spending on air this Whittier Access project the $50000000 project and I'm just kind of curious. But the problem we had the Birdman and I just wonder why we don't leave that money in the bank and the guys were out there with it out of from a crater here or from Portage on to Whittier I mean I think it's kind of a waste of money. I think opening up access to Prince William Sound is a very positive approach. The opening of the Whittier tunnel which will be paid 90 percent by the federal government is something that will really enrich the lives of a lot of Alaskans certainly and many visitors to the state in making it much more accessible. We have been you know the railroad of

course does make trips there and that does provide a lot of the access but it is estimated up to a quarter million trips will be made to Whittier once the road opens where now it is literally within the much much smaller than that. So I think that will give an opportunity I think that it certainly puts a responsibility on us to make sure that we don't destroy the resource that we're opening up by abuse and that it be well planned and well thought through and there is a process by which the entire Prince William Sound planning effort is being directed to to make sure that we accomplish that but I'm excited about it. I think it's going to be a positive thing and not a waste of money at all. The next caller is from. Good morning. Well you're on the air. I really want to thank the Governor for coming on and sharing his views in this forum and I really want to thank Public Radio. I have a

couple questions and a comment. I think how tough it is to deal with people flying apart in this state and I think a couple people in the state the governor especially but also Fran. You know I keep in a board of fisheries here the chairman were here in Sitka last year and we had hearings in the board of fish took action on subsistence issues and one of the things that's really happened here and sit there sit get private residence subsistence is something that's a shared resource for all of us and we tried together to protect it and enhance it and I really want to pass on to the governor that there is any answer to this problem it's in. Again listening to the concerns and needs of the residents I really must congratulate. Their persistence their fighting for subsistence rights for community.

The question I have for the governor is. Any progress here your positions on this but is there any progress together and then the final thing that Richard Roberts the Pacific Fishery Management Council bringing together some of those problems. Is there any hope in the state that we can do something now. If you want a subsistence parrot. Eric thank you. The answer I believe is yes. I get up every morning with hope and certainly in resolving the subsistence issue. It is one that we can do I think. You bring out some very good points and I know you both working as a commercial fisherman but also as I recall at one time having your own sport fishing show on public radio that you above all else above all else care for the resource and the resolutions that have been achieved on some contentious issues by

the board of fish regarding subsistence use of various species in the in the in the utilization of deer types in the city area has been a real positive. Accomplishment I think can be a way of showing that there can be some very good resolutions of these issues. Again Also I would appreciate your comments in the North Pacific fisheries management Council's approach to that and it's in this way that sometimes as we have success at the grassroots level it makes you believe that we certainly could have success at a higher policy level. It would be established through the legislature allowing Alaskans to weigh and vote on it. And this is something that people have tried to do ever since 1989. It has been frustrated sometimes by just one or two votes or people turning their back on what I think everyone agrees the majority of Alaskans would like to weigh in and

resolve through a vote of the people. In addition to making some changes to Anelka as well as state statute too or because there is a balance of values that can be brought together. Lieutenant governor did a great job last year I think can bring forward a package that represented that. It failed to get the ear of the legislature. So sometimes maybe that means we need to take it back to the grassroots and look to some type of of initiative efforts. But in one way or another I believe Alaskans will weigh in and get it resolved. How about any comments on his references to the more specific management council and is that is that another route that that involves this even RC of the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council deals with those areas of federal waters outside the three mile limit with the exception of the state does manage the crab fishery so they won't really resolve the subsistence issue. But they have taken I think of a very good approach to making sure

that there is an Alaskan solution. Alaska jobs in and through the CD key programs through resources that should benefit this state within the context of federal rules are provided. Our next caller is from Fairbanks. Good morning you're on the air. Good morning. Hello hello. Yes you're on the air going. Governor you know I live in Fairbanks on southeast Fishman also and I want to commend you for the work that you've done and your appointment and that fisheries base question. Well first I'd like to plug Rick lever again for his renomination. Duty you know to the council and my question though I hope it's not too loaded. But is it true that you're considering nominating Henry Mitchell who now works for Tyson the Seattle based trial or group to the council. There are two seats open. The number of people who have applied for it. They're

all under consideration. So I would like to respectfully suggest that I know Henry has done a great job for Alaska but my concerns are that you know he now works for both the Seattle based company that is well represented on the council. I'm also concerned about you know Tyson seafood and chicken farming and possibly getting their foot in the door for salmon farming. I'm sure I'd like to respectfully suggest that he be appointed to the Acme board and help us market our seafood if that's possible. And I'd just like to voice some concerns about who his boxes are and at this time. Well appreciate your you're voicing that opinion and as I review it there is a March 15th deadline to submit names to the secretary of commerce and I'll certainly take your thoughts into consideration. You say you have not excluded any of the any of the people who are have been under consideration. Are there many. I think probably 10 or 15 people would have died.

Ward. Let's take our next call from Homer. Good morning you're on the air. Yeah good morning. Can hear me OK just fine go ahead this morning. Morning sir how are you. I wasted time out of the situation. I think we're wasting a lot of money there. Number one it's only about a one chance in a hundred they're going to even hear the case. And number two I think is the least of that a 9 percent shut you're going to lose it. Twenty year line past an accident years ago and they did still have the simple title to the land they have the right to patrol it to get to the racetrack and without my day they're not going to and they have a right to control the amount of game to come on that land that comes to them. Everybody just supplied it. Only thing I completely come do is if we get too much people up here are the subsistence sources maybe we should stop trying to get people to move up there.

Well maybe just a couple of comments on that. You're absolutely right in terms of those lands that were given to surface rights to pillage corporations and subsurface rights to regional corporations that is privately owned by those corporations but the fishing game management is controlled by the state except in those areas that the feds have taken over because of our failure to comply with Title 8 of the Milkha So the management of the resource is in state hands and should be and we need to fight for that because I think there's a long term threat both to the resource as well as to the opportunity to use it as best we see fit for Alaska's benefits. So that is where I believe that the at the direction of the bean case is wrong both for I believe native Alaskans as well as all Alaskans. Many people can comment as to whether or not we have a good

shot with the Supreme Court. I think it's my responsibility to make sure that we put our very best case forward with the values that we believe in and proceed on. Our next caller is from. Good morning you're on the air. Yes good morning Governor No just Mr. Wheeler Nome Alaska are you today science or history or how are you fine. I disagree with your position on the state must have state authority with no regard to co-management of Fish and Game and also that the sovereignty issue number one. Number one the state has not informed the citizens of this case in particular. And I don't know if they intend to the subsistence issue is put on the back burner again another to talk it over. So I put in another talk mode. It's another delay don't get to subsistence issue. And this

Ninth Circuit decision on Venus I was very specific in the criteria that designated Indian country and that is really not mentioned in the blast at the state and all the other people have against the decision. And I for I really feel it's important that both sides get equal airing because when you talk about the Indian Country issue there's only about six or seven that might in the future qualify. And we we perfectly know where they are that all of the issue but the general public. Are unaware really pits we in us. I'm a native but I I feel that we should live together and and cooperate but what is what is not. It is a unique relationship that Alaska natives have with both governments state and federal. And the fact that you put it to the vote. We're only 16 percent of the total

population in the state thereabouts and. And then on the subsistence issue addresses the non-natives as far as subsistence. Yet the politics of the federal government plays against the state and the state plays against the federal. It just got to go away I mean I feel that it's wrong and I'd like to see the state and what are you going to do to inform the public the citizens of the state of which I am too and and let them know the true story. Is this the scare tactics that they use in the vien it-I decision are uncalled for and the state legislature. I don't believe you should appropriate a half a million dollars for the suit. It's just wasted money. I don't have a problem with them contributing money to the case. I have a million dollar bird. OK well a number of points there and certainly I think is you feel

that if the legislature is beyond the reason in its appropriation I would encourage you to inform legislators of that issue and people who do disagree with it I think they need to weigh in on it in regards to subsistence. I do disagree with those who who believe that subsistence should take a back seat to this issue. It need not in fact I have encouraged each year that I have been in office that we resolve the subsistence issue with a vote of the people. We have made every effort to go through any number of doors to get to a just resolution of that problem. It has eluded us to this point. Primarily I feel because the legislature has failed to address it. There are other ways that people can take control of the situation and that I believe is is a fundamental issue that does speak to again the the whole essence of self-dependence and to preserving and

protecting the the essence of living in rural Alaska. So I think that that can't be on the front in regards to CO management of the State Fish and Game Department is working at a level never before achieved with regards to ABC and Couric and TCC the the the regional village corporations the associations that I think can bring a whole lot to providing for some very reasonable policy so I think that we are making progress on it. I do disagree with the with any diminishing of the state's authority over fish and game you know over taxation I think that that hurts everybody in regards to the 16 percent. I think everybody agrees that if it were to be put in front of the Alaska voter that in all probability that the large majority would support a rural preference for subsistence so

people don't always vote along any particular given ally's they do I think look for the greater good in education is always. As you've pointed out the benefit of not hinders to understanding the issue is going to take up one minute for our local stations to identify themselves and we'll be right back with the call in show. You're listening to the talk of Alaska and the Alaska Public Radio Network. The book. Today's talk of Alaska the governor's Monthly Call it comes to you from a PR ran the Alaska Public Radio Network. It's made possible by AT&T Alaska your true choice and with the support of listeners like you who belong to this AP member station with your business or organization can also underwrite public radio programming. From a PR ad call 1 800 7 5 2. AP are at. It with. It with.

The earth. We're only going to. The bathroom. We're back with talk of Alaska I'm Dave Donaldson and with me is Governor Tony Knowles. Let's change the subject just a little bit here. Not not putting off anybody that wants to talk about the Indian country and the lawsuits but change couple of other things. Governor let me just ask the question I understand that there has been some some changes in the state's promotional policies in particular involving the film office. And there's a there's been a billboard down in Hollywood were that it's actually been promoting making movies up here and the sort of stuff where it where is all that stand that sort of promotion and a particular sphere we govern we seek can we go to Hollywood and

see pictures of Alaska in full force this year. What day. I believe that marketing Alaska is a good place to do business is certainly to our benefit and we're doing everything we can to make sure that businesses that want to invest in Alaska and do business here understand that we've met with a lot of success obviously with oil and gas and with fisheries and mining and that also goes to the film industry and there has been a lot of success in people not only doing regular films up here but also advertisements and there are some difficulties in coming to Alaska but we do offer I think some unique opportunities to help promote either an individual piece of film or work or advertising. In the past we have had a film office. We're faced with a reducing budget and figuring out how to do something smarter and with less money and I think we're accomplishing that. One of the ways that has been used to promote Alaska is with a billboard. And frankly this is going to be the

last year of that as far as the Knowles administration is going. It cost thirty two thousand dollars not on how many decisions it makes but people going by on the freeway but also I believe that in addition to not being perhaps the wisest use of the resource in getting people to do business here it also is kind of a contradiction from what I believe Alaska is all about here we want to protect our own natural scenery and beauty. We are the only state as I understand in America that doesn't allow billboards. And yet isn't it. Isn't it strange that then we would use a billboard in another state to diminish whatever beauty is left in Los Angeles to promote our own natural clean environment so I think it's that it's the wrong medium. It's a good message. But certainly the wrong medium and we are also having to.