Preserving Alaska's Food Security: AFPC’s Advocacy for the No Action Alternative on (d)(1) Lands
By Rachel Lord, AFPC Advocacy and Policy Director
As advocates for a resilient and sustainable food system in Alaska, the Alaska Food Policy Council (AFPC) is deeply invested in ensuring the protection of food security for all Alaskans. In response to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) 17(d)(1) Withdrawals of 28 million acres in Alaska, the AFPC recently submitted comments in support of the No Action Alternative (Alternative A).
ANCSA 17(d)(1) lands refer to areas in Alaska subject to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971 with a designation to safeguard public interests, including the preservation of natural resources, protection of cultural heritage, and facilitation of specific public uses. The impacts of withdrawing these lands can be appreciated from the draft EIS executive summary:
“Revocation of the withdrawals in full would allow for the public lands laws to be implemented in full. This would include the selection of lands pursuant to the Alaska Statehood Act, which would allow the State of Alaska's top filed selections to become effective selections if the land is not otherwise encumbered, and would open lands to mineral leasing, mining claim location and entry, and all other forms of appropriation from which the lands are currently withdrawn.”
In our comment letter to the BLM, we commended the thorough assessment of the 2021 Public Land Orders (PLOs) in the draft EIS, particularly the inclusion of Tribal consultation. However, we underscored the critical need to prioritize the preservation of food security, especially for rural communities reliant on subsistence hunting and gathering.
Our comments on the draft EIS highlighted the significant implications of proposed action alternatives on food security across Alaska. While the draft EIS acknowledged potential adverse effects, our additional insights drew attention to the multifaceted challenges faced by Alaskans, as evidenced by reports such as the Alaska Food Security and Independence Task Force 2023 Report and Feeding America's Map the Meal Gap 2023 report.
We emphasized the discrepancy between purported economic benefits and the tangible risks to subsistence activities and cultural continuity posed by the proposed actions. The reduction in subsistence access, as outlined in the draft EIS, would exacerbate food insecurity and nutritional challenges, particularly in regions already experiencing high rates of food insecurity.
Furthermore, we urged the BLM to address a scoping comment regarding reindeer grazing, stressing the importance of considering the impacts on both the reindeer industry and the cultural significance of this practice in the Bering Straits region.
AFPC's advocacy for the No Action Alternative reflects our steadfast commitment to safeguarding Alaska's food security and preserving the rich cultural heritage intertwined with subsistence practices. By prioritizing the protection of subsistence access, we hope the BLM will take the No Action alternative and promote the resilience of Alaska's food systems for generations to come.
Some other perspectives:
Alaska tribes urge protection for federal lands (Alaska Beacon, December 7, 2023)
