HJR 15 - Relating to Support for an "American Lands Sovereignty Protection Act" in the United States Congress.

This legislation is to reaffirm and pledge continued support for the Alaska State Legislative Resolve 31 passed on to Congress in March 1997.

We cannot afford to ignore what is happening to our sovereignty, or avoid examining the potential and practical impacts of World Heritage sites or Biosphere Reserve listings in Alaska. Stop to consider that major areas like the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve and other areas totaling over 40 million acres have already been listed as World Heritage Sites or Biosphere Reserves in Alaska.

Immediately following the recent designation of a portion of Kamchatka as a World Heritage Site, strong efforts began by environmental groups to block investment insurance for development projects on Kamchatka that the local communities supported. It is just as we feared, and is highly conceivable that most, if not all, National Parks and some National Wildlife Refuges and Wilderness areas in Alaska could qualify for listing under the Conventions.

You can be sure that each area listed in the future will also include buffer zones and transitory zones, and that the same ecological standards for use and development will apply to these areas as are applied to buffer zones surrounding Yellowstone National Park and other World Heritage Sites.

Alaska's National Parks and National Wildlife Refuge Systems are unique somewhat. In exchange for the delineation of large federal land withdraws in our state, major concessions on further use by Alaskans were incorporated in their purposes and mission. Certain activities, normally excluded automatically in other similar areas of the United States, such as oil development, mining, hunting, fishing and trapping, were identified in some areas of Alaska as being legitimate potentially compatible uses. Congress specifically authorized existing transportation methods and means to assure continued traditional uses within the withdrawals and to assure access to all the interspersed state and private lands within and surrounding federal lands. The question that many ask is if the proposed restrictions by the World Heritage Committee have the effect of over-riding congressional intent?

Another concern is if established subsistence uses could be eliminated within existing National Parks. And is it possible that established transportation corridors could be closed to use by Alaskans? Could the international convention community apply unilateral trapping standards to these areas? These are areas of deep concern and we urge congressional debate over these issues and eventual clarification by Congress.