• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Knik River Valley in Jeopardy!

An email I got from a friend on the subject.

Alaska Frontier Trappers Association
December 11 at 5:40pm
I copied this from another persons posted:
To ALL Knik River Public Use Area users-
I will try to keep this as short as possible but you must read this. The BLM is in the process of conveying ALL federal lands in the Knik valley to Eklutna Incorporated as their final land selection under ANILCA. There is one item that is holding up this conveyance. BLM is attempting to reclassify the Knik River as non-navigable between two township lines located at approximately Friday and between Metal creeks. All the land in between these lines is federal land and will be conveyed. By reclassifying the river, it effectively gives Eklutna the river. The federal land goes completely across the entire Knik valley. This will stop all river access to the glacier. Additionally all the land in this area including all the sandbars will be off limits to all boats, atvs, aircraft, horses, etc. there is one trail on the north side of the river that traverses this area on an RS 2477 public access easement so atv and vehicles can still access the glacier but only on this trail. The State of Alaska DNR is suing to stop this reclassification of the Knik River. The waters above and below the township lines are classified as navigable waters and are not effected. If BLM is allowed to do this then it is very likely that they will do this to other rivers in Alaska.
Presently, Eklutna allows access onto their land by permit only for only foot traffic. Hunting and fishing are prohibited.
Please share this post with every one of your friends and State representatives, Senators and Congressman.



 
For those uninformed as to who Eklutna is on the surface, I had to look -

Incorporated in 1972, Eklutna, Inc. was organized under and bound by the Alaska Corporations Code and the provisions of ANCSA and continues to play a vital role in the economic landscape of the Anchorage area.
Eklutna is the largest private landowner in Anchorage, owning 90,000 acres within the Municipality of Anchorage, including Eagle River, Birchwood, Chugiak, Peters Creek and Eklutna. Additionally, Eklutna has significant holdings in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, with an approximate 67,000 additional acres due to be conveyed from the Bureau of Land Management. As a land developer, we own some of the last remaining prime commercial, industrial and residential real estate within the Municipality of Anchorage.
Today, the Corporation represents more than 170 shareholders and manages a variety of investments, including commercial properties and residential developments.


....largest private landowner in Anchorage... owning some of the last remaining prime real estate...
Call me conservative, but I don't see this model lending itself to being "committed to recreation".

Passed in 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) extinguished Native land claims to almost all of Alaska in exchange for about one-ninth of the state’s land plus $962.5 million in compensation. By conveying Native land titles to 12 regional and 200 local village corporations chartered under Alaska state law, ANCSA changed the relationship between Natives and the land from one of co-ownership of shared lands to one of corporate shareholding; i.e., land ownership was based on a corporate model, and governmental entities, including traditional or IRA “tribal” governments.



 
Oh. So now there will be a bunch of old sofas and easy chairs set up to view the easment trail! Awesome.
 
We'll probably see usage fees payable to the native corporation. Wonder if the borough can assesses property taxes?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
To me it isn't about the land or Eklutna inc. I have no issue with their land claims. It's about the river. To reclassify it as non-navigable is the threat.
 
Non-navigable is B.S. Anything 2" deep and 6 feet wide is navigable.....least for me... Point the 200 hp jet unit down to skip across protruding pebbles with the bow.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I seem to recall that the Chuit river next to Tyonek village was a target of the "non-navigable" crowd. From what I hear it was beat back. Perhaps this info can be dug up and referenced for a future battle.
 
To me it isn't about the land or Eklutna inc. I have no issue with their land claims. It's about the river. To reclassify it as non-navigable is the threat.

I think this is spot on.

How they would reclassify a section of it non-navigable, with navigable above and below (no access to the upper part) is really a mystery.

We had a river issue here and it became navigable. In talking with the coast guard dude that made the case for it he told me "navigable has to do with commerce. If there is commerce on the river, it is navigable without a doubt." There is more to it, but the simple answer is often the best.

Seems a good set of photos showing that the upper and lower need the middle for access, and showing the amount of commerce in the upper area would cover the needed proof.

Where could one find a picture of a bunch of people and aircraft cars and boats on the upper river?

But I would be getting the representation in DC on my side for this one.
 
Navigability is a huge can of worms, and is almost always settled the courts.....after years of litigation. The determination has more to do with history than it does with size or depth, or even the ability to drive a boat on it.

Streams have been determined navigable at least largely based on long history of winter use by dog teams.

But this will likely be decided in the courts.


MTV
 
The practical difference between navigable and non is any banks, sandbars, islands, etc below mean high water are usable by the public on a navigable river. Those areas are private property on non-navigable rivers. As is the water itself. The landowner literally owns the river. Somebody will probably nit-pick some details but that the gist of it.

According to the article navigability is tied to the 1950s. In those days Lake George would break out and flood the valley. Maybe that should be the basis for the mean high water line?
 
Thanks, Stewart. I was alerted to this issue b/c I was researching Knik gravel bar usage and a web search came up with the dispute. It must have caused quite a furor up there.
J

 
Back
Top