The DNR Commissioner is set to appear before the Senate Natural Resources Committee on October 26th.

On Wednesday, October 14th, the Alaska State Senate Natural Resources Committee (SNRC) convened in Anchorage to discuss concerns about recent proposals for Charitable and Public Use conveyances from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) and requested the appearance of the DNR Commissioner to address their concerns and answer questions. The two land conveyances the SNRC cited as particularly concerning are the proposed transfer of nearly 20,000 acres near Houston, AK, and the conveyance of over 800 acres near Point MacKenzie.  

Committee Concerns 

The proposed land conveyance from the DNR to AIDEA in Houston is the committee’s primary concern due to its size: nearly 20,000 acres being transferred using the public and charitable use clause to convey such large pieces of land that are generally leased or sold, not transferred at no cost to the recipient and typically used for small parcels for churches, parks, or other public projects/structures. The other major question is why the DNR waived the transfer's reversionary provision, which allows the DNR to retake ownership of the land if it is not used; the DNR did not waive this clause for the 800-plus acres proposed for conveyance to AIDEA near Point MacKenzie. This raises an obvious question the committee seeks to answer: why the difference? Since AIDEA has not outlined any specific plans for the land in Houston, it seems important that the DNR retains the reversionary clause. Since this clause has been waived and AIDEA has no plan for the land, the committee has questions about whether this qualifies as an appropriation of land that should be run through the legislature, not executive appointees or actions.  BHA covered in our previous blog the Houston land conveyance, where the DNR also waived its authority to conduct environmental assessments and monitoring of lands it conveys in charitable and public-use cases. We at the Alaska chapter of BHA would like the committee to question this waiver as well. The committee also referenced a recent land lease by the University of Alaska (which is private and may lease or convey lands at its discretion) to flesh out how much value the DNR was transferring to AIDEA by giving AIDEA the lands rather than leasing them, as is typical under the public and charitable use clause. The number is staggering; given that the University leases roughly 800 acres of land for over $500K/ year, the committee applied a similar theoretical value to the land in Houston and concluded that the DNR was giving up roughly $14 million in potential general fund revenue by transferring the land rather than leasing it. What plan for this land does AIDEA have that qualifies for more than $14 million per year in charitable and public good to justify taking this land away from the public, hunters, and anglers? 

It is of note that the Commissioner of the DNR has been asked, multiple times by the Senate Resources Committee, to supply information and appear at Committee hearings, and has not yet done so. He has recently agreed to be present at the October 26th hearing, which the public can tune in to once it is posted here. For now (as of October 16th, 2026), you can watch the October 14th meeting and review the minutes.  

The Alaska Chapter of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers previously covered the proposed Houston Land Transfer and the importance of that land to hunters and the public in the Mat-Su Valley in our blog post here.