The State of Alaska is opening a land sale to privatize public land under the guise of “food security,” even though it likely won't impact actual food supplies for three decades. Many local residents are asking that the Nenana-Totchaket land sale pause until appropriate land analysis and Tribal consultations can be completed.

Get involved by signing the letter telling the Governor to slow down!

These are some of our concerns:

Lack of local preference - In conversations with people in Nenana, the State of Alaska promised the land sale would include a local preference to ensure Alaskans had the first opportunity to buy this land. The State also promised that parcels would be under 20 acres and that buyers would have a right of first refusal for bordering property in order to expand. Now parcels are over 20 acres, the sale has been opened to non-residents, and they aren’t laid out in a way that would allow expansion.

Questions: Why are the parcels so large? Where is the right of first refusal, and how will folks with interior parcels be able to expand? What steps are being taken to ensure this land isn’t taken by out of state speculators?

Clear-cutting requirement - Currently, the sale requires clearing and tilling at least 25% of farmable land. Locals are concerned about this due to reports showing many areas of less than 6 inches of topsoil over permafrost. This thin soil layer, in combination with the increased rates of thunderstorms and flooding, makes the land vulnerable to erosion, especially if clear cutting is required. This would have significant impacts on the local waterways and wildlife. Instead of requiring clear-cutting, the State could develop an evidence-based, locally-tailored management plan or support the creation of a Soil and Water Conservation District.

Questions: Why is clear-cutting required? Has the ecological impact of clear-cutting been considered? Have alternatives been considered? 

Cost - Some estimates have put the cost in the tens of millions of dollars, including road improvements and electricity. In the short term, there are concerns that total spending would dwarf the likely revenue from the sale, and that in the longer term, the potential increased tax revenue from the land and agricultural activity on it may not be adequate to pay for the long-term maintenance of the infrastructure.

Questions: What is the total estimated public cost of this entire project? In the long term, if the public investment will increase property values, then by how much? Will the increased tax revenue from that land and agricultural activity on it be adequate to pay for the long-term maintenance of the infrastructure? Or will this spending also stick taxpayers with an expensive, long-term obligation? 

Land access - In order to access the parcels, landowners would have to use a tribally owned bridge, as well as a road which is in poor condition and would likely require Federal Wetland Permits and Federal funding. These federal actions could require formal tribal consultations and a subsistence evaluation, which haven’t happened yet.

Questions: Why is the road being proposed and permitted separately from the land sale (seeing as the road would be needed to access the land)? How will buyers be able to access their land if the tribe doesn't agree to allow use of the bridge or the Federal government blocks an update to the road? 

Unfinished Anadromous Waters and other Ecological Studies - Another area of concern is that the Tanana River Drainage anadromous waters catalog is currently being updated, and this process is incomplete. This is particularly troubling given last year’s collapse in the Yukon River salmon population, and predictions of the same this year. In addition, soil mapping, wildlife areas, and corridor mapping studies all remain unfinished.

Questions: How much of these studies have been completed? When is completion expected? Why are they still incomplete prior to the sale opening? 

Investment in Mat-Su farmland - The State is planning to privatize these public lands under what is seen by some as a misguided attempt to promote food security. Critics ask why the State isn’t instead investing resources in protecting Mat-Su farmland from encroaching development, which would have an immediate impact on food production as it is ready to be farmed, is near large population centers, and is already connected to the road system, unlike the Nenana land.

Questions: Why is the State focusing on Nenana? Has the State done a cost-benefit analysis of investing in Mat-Su vs. Nenana? 

Lack of protection for historic and cultural resources - The Nenana Tribe has been using this land for generations for subsistence livelihoods and there are many areas of cultural and historical significance. The sale brochure states that landowners will need permission to farm those areas, but it is unknown whether those areas have been identified by the State of Alaska.

Questions: Have archaeological sites and subsistence use areas been identified by the State of Alaska? What is the State's plan for protecting those areas?

Choose one of the options below to get involved!

Further reading:

KUAC: Nenana-area locals urge state to ‘slow down’ agricultural land sales

“The state held its first auction last month for 2,000 acres in the Nenana-Totchaket Agricultural Project, as part of what state officials call an effort to improve Alaska’s food security. But many area residents say they and their forebears harvested food from the land and its streams long before the project was proposed. And they doubt it will yield more food security. “When I grew up there, it was just bountiful resources. We lived comfortably off the land,” says Eva Burk, who grew up on land that’s now within the ag project. Burk is Dene Athabascan, and she and her family, like many other area residents, spent summers at fish camp and winters working a trapline. But she says fish and wildlife populations have for decades been declining.”

High Country News: Will a Native-led initiative spur an agricultural revolution in rural Alaska?

“When Eva Dawn Burk first saw Calypso Farm and Ecology Center in 2019, she felt enchanted. Calypso is an educational farm tucked away in a boreal forest in Ester, Alaska, near Fairbanks... Calypso reminded Burk, 38, who is Denaakk’e and Lower Tanana Athabascan from the villages of Nenana and Manley Hot Springs, of her family’s traditional fish camp in the Alaskan Interior, where she spent childhood summers... Now Burk is partnering with Calypso to promote local food production and combat food insecurity in Alaska Native communities. The initiative involves building partnerships with tribes to teach local tribal members, particularly youth, about agriculture and traditional knowledge. The project is still in its infancy, but Burk hopes to help spur an agricultural revolution in rural Native villages, where food costs are exorbitant and fresh produce is hard to come by.”

Fairbanks Daily Newsminer: Nenana farmers to state on land sale: ‘slow down’

“When the state opened up 2,000 acres of land in the Nenana-Totchaket Agricultural Project in June, it billed it as a potential stepping stone to solve Alaska’s food insecurity problem. Several locals want the State to slow down, gather more local input and wait for data from a still-ongoing soil analysis.”

Reporting from Alaska: Dunleavy's hurried Nenana agriculture land auction is a campaign stunt, an invitation to bankruptcy for the unprepared

“Just in time for his reelection campaign, Gov. Mike Dunleavy has thrown together an agricultural ‘plan’ for Nenana that would be more accurately described as an invitation for bankruptcy for those who buy undeveloped state land at 5 percent down and dream of an agrarian future... If you want the cartoon version of agricultural development in Alaska, Dunleavy’s trying to sell it.”

Reporting from Alaska: Dunleavy's campaign timeline handicaps Nenana ag plan with conflicting claims

“The time demands of the Dunleavy reelection campaign dictated the decision to start selling lands in the Nenana agricultural area before the state worked out key details about access and electricity. This lack of preparation guarantees that the property is less valuable. It also reflects Dunleavy’s willingness to sacrifice public benefits for the sake of his personal interest.”

Interested in getting more involved in these kinds of issues? Click below to join the Regenerative Economy working group!