Outdoor recreation is a pathway to better health and a stronger economy. Outdoor recreation and tourism leaders came together to prepare a non-partisan candidate questionnaire for Alaska governor candidates.
Early voting begins August 3 for the August 18 Primary Election. Find where to vote here. Statewide elections are NOT vote by mail. Apply to vote by mail here.
Q&A with Alaska Candidates for Governor on Six Outdoor Recreation & Tourism Questions
There are 17 candidates running for governor. All were invited, and ten candidates responded to the survey. Candidates are listed alphabetically by last name: Tom Begich, Click Bishop, Meda DeWitt, Michael Gilbert, Shelley Hughes, Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Henry Kroll, James Parkin, Destry Payne and Bill Walker.
Question 1: Role of Alaska’s outdoors in your life
Alaska’s outdoors play many roles in people’s lives—as places for recreation, subsistence, cultural connection, health, community, and livelihood. What role does Alaska’s outdoors play in your own life, and how has that shaped your views of outdoor recreation issues, opportunities and challenges?
Tom Begich
All my life, I have had the good fortune to be a part of the expanding network of trails and outdoor opportunities that shaped Alaska and Anchorage in the early years of statehood. From high school on, we have been able to backpack in the Chugach backcountry, just hours from our homes. Following 55 Ways to the Wilderness as a bit of our own outdoor bible, we learned all about the back country in our own backyard. I’ve camped throughout Alaska and have always admired our outdoor opportunities – they shaped my admiration and understanding of Alaska’s unique beauty. In our more urban settings, I have helped with the clean-up of our creeks, participated in and enjoyed the expansion of bike and pedestrian trails, and enjoyed the development of our roadside parks and opportunities as well. Experiencing our outdoors was essential to crafting my sense of community, my belief in conservation of our resources, and my appreciation for the delicate balance between humanity and nature that Alaska represents. However, for much of the last 25 years, we have watched our current network of park services deteriorate.
Despite claiming to encourage tourism and a better quality of life, we have faced severe budget cuts to parks and recreation at the state and local levels. When I joined Senator Weilechowski in championing funding for the Long Trail, we faced the Governor’s headwinds and – while securing the Anchorage area funding – failed to stop a veto of the remaining funds. Supporting improvements to our roadside parks, access to our backcountry experiences, and opportunities for cycling, skiing, and other outdoor activities is what makes Alaska the kind of place where we want to live, raise a family, and spend our years. The great Alaskan outdoors is part of what draws people here, keeps us here, and is integral to Alaskans’ way of life in urban and rural Alaska.
Click Bishop
Hunting, fishing, snowmachining, or simply spending time with family and friends in Alaska’s outdoors has shaped me to my core.
I’ve always believed our public lands are one of Alaska’s greatest assets. They’re where we recharge, teach the next generation, and connect with our communities and our heritage. Its why we live here.
Having represented most of Interior Alaska for many years, I’ve also seen how outdoor recreation offers different things across our state. For some, it’s a neighborhood trail or access to places like Chugach State Park. For others, it’s a river, trail, or winter route that supports subsistence, hunting, fishing, or access to cabins and camps. Good public policy recognizes all of those values.
Outdoor recreation also supports thousands of Alaska jobs—from guides and outfitters to local restaurants, lodging, retail businesses, and manufacturers. Protecting access while responsibly managing our public lands benefits both our quality of life and our economy.
Meda DeWitt
Alaska’s lands and waters are inseparable from who I am. As a Lingít woman, mother, traditional healer, educator, and lifelong Alaskan, I do not understand them simply as scenery or recreational assets. They are living relatives. They are our classrooms, grocery stores, medicine cabinets, places of prayer, places of work, and places where families strengthen their relationships with one another.
My relationship with the outdoors is rooted in culture, subsistence, healing, and responsibility. I have learned from plants, waters, trails, Elders, harvest practices, and the knowledge carried by communities throughout Alaska. My personal credo is to leave behind a world capable of supporting life and a culture worth living for. That responsibility shapes every decision I make about land and water.
My professional conservation work has deepened that understanding. Through the IMAGO Initiative, I helped bring Indigenous leaders, conservationists, and federal land managers together in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for place-based conversations about how public lands should be managed. We sat together on the land, listened to Elders, participated in traditional processes, and built relationships that could not have been created by looking at maps in a conference room. That experience affirmed something Indigenous people have always known: people make better decisions about a place when they understand their relationship and responsibility to it.
Outdoor recreation policy must reflect the many ways Alaskans live with the land. That includes walking, biking, skiing, snowmachining, hunting, fishing, gathering berries, harvesting medicines, teaching children, reconnecting with culture, guiding visitors, and spending time together as families. Subsistence and cultural access are not recreational amenities, but they often depend on the same trails, waterways, parking areas, cabins, and access corridors.
That relationship to the outdoors also makes me practical. Safe access matters. Maintenance matters. Trailheads, parking, bathrooms, bridges, cabins, winter access, water access, and clear signage matter. When Alaska neglects outdoor infrastructure, communities and volunteers carry the burden, public safety suffers, natural and cultural resources are damaged, and local businesses lose opportunities.
As governor, I would treat outdoor recreation as both a public good and an important part of Alaska’s economy. Our outdoor systems should be well maintained, locally supported, culturally respectful, environmentally durable, and accessible to Alaskans. Tourism should strengthen communities rather than overwhelm them. Recreation should create good jobs, improve health, support young people, and deepen our shared responsibility to the places that sustain us.
Michael Gilbert
Alaskan outdoors has always been special to me and my running mate, we both hunt, fish, and enjoy outdoor activities when we can. Our administration WILL work with legislators, the state treasury, and the secretary of the interior to ensure future Alaskan’s can also enjoy the great outdoors.
Shelley Hughes
I have lived across Alaska from Hoonah and Bethel to Fort Yukon, Fairbanks, Seward, and Palmer, and this deep experience has shaped and grounded my appreciation for the state’s parks and recreation opportunities. These aren’t abstract amenities to me; they are lived experiences tied to fishing, hunting, hiking, and community life. I understand that access to open land, trails, rivers, and wildlife is central to both Alaska’s identity and economic vitality. My perspective connects recreation to broader goals: maintaining healthy communities, supporting tourism, and ensuring Alaskans can continue to live off and enjoy the land. For my family, parks and recreation are not separate from policy. They are part of preserving opportunity, freedom, and quality of life across the state.
Alaska’s outdoors have shaped nearly every part of my life. Whether fishing Alaska’s rivers, traveling our trails, spending time with family in the outdoors, or simply experiencing the beauty and freedom that make our state unique, the outdoors are not something separate from daily life in Alaska, they are part of who we are.
For many Alaskans, outdoor spaces are places of recreation, but they are also places of subsistence, cultural connection, and family tradition. They are where we teach our children self-reliance, where we gather food for our families, and where we connect with friends and neighbors. Those experiences have reinforced my belief that access to Alaska’s outdoors is fundamental to our quality of life.
I also recognize the important role outdoor recreation plays in our economy. Visitors travel from around the world to experience Alaska’s parks, trails, waterways, wildlife, and public lands. The same assets that enrich the lives of residents also support thousands of jobs and small businesses throughout the state.
At the same time, growing demand creates challenges. More use means greater maintenance needs, pressure on infrastructure, parking, public safety, and resource protection. My view is that we must strike a balance between access, stewardship, and economic opportunity. Alaskans should have access to well-maintained recreation areas while ensuring these resources remain healthy and productive for future generations.
As governor, I will support practical investments that improve access, strengthen local communities, promote tourism, and protect the outdoor experiences that make Alaska unlike anywhere else in the world.
Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
I grew up in Sitka with the forest as my backyard, and spent most of my childhood exploring outside and getting dirt under my fingernails. My time in Boy Scouts, which included a 550-mile canoe trip down the Yukon when I was in sixth grade, helped further seed a deep love for the outdoors. I hiked the Chilkoot Trail solo as a seventh grader (the NPS staff couldn’t believe my parents were letting me do it). My Sitka High School senior project was retracing (in reverse) the Tlingit Kiks.ádi survival march — a 70-mile backcountry traverse from the northern tip of Baranof Island to Sitka — with my best friend. Which is just to say, there was probably no greater influence on my growing up in Sitka than spending time in the outdoors.
As an adult, I developed a passion for trail races and ultramarathons and recreating by skiff, paraglider, and packraft. These experiences have given me a deep understanding that Alaska’s outdoors serve many different purposes for many different people. I’ve also spent enough time outside Alaska that I appreciate we can do some things much more and better, and that there are other models around the country and the world that we should be looking at and emulating. As governor, I would seek a wide range of input from all user groups on outdoor issues, but most of all I would center the outdoors as a common denominator that can help unite Alaskans.
Henry Kroll
I am Alaska Gubernatorial Candidate Henry Kroll, Author of 14 books. I was born in Seldovia, fished king crab 22 years and salmon 74 years. My web sites are: www.HenryKroll.com and www.HankKroll.com Address: 26571 Heavy Down Drive Soldotna, Alaska 99669
James Parkin
The outdoors is my life. I live in Angoon Alaska. There are more bears than people. I live in the wilderness. Alaska’s beauty is one of the main reasons why people come to and choose to stay in Alaska. I am adopted Tlingit. Emma Demmert is my clan mother. My family and I are culturally involved with the community and the community’s culture is deeply tied to the environment. Some of my grandchildren are Tlingit. We hunt, fish, gather and otherwise subsist on the land. As a biologist, natural scientist and science teacher for 30 years, I have gained a deep understanding of the complex beauty and function of nature. There is nothing more important to our health or community than preserving and protecting nature. Our lives and future generations depend on our stewardship.
Destry Payne
Snow machining, Riding trails with my ATV, spending time just being in the wilderness.
Bill Walker
I grew up in Valdez, where there was no TV until after I returned from college, so the outdoors has always been part of my life. I think that is true for most Alaskans. We do not necessarily think of “outdoor recreation” as separate from everything else we do. It is where we hunt, fish, hike, gather, spend time with family and friends, and often where we are reminded why we live here in the first place.
This is personal in my family as well. My wife, Donna, was the first Parks and Recreation Director for the City of Valdez nearly 50 years ago. I learned a long time ago that recreation opportunities do not just happen. Someone has to plan for them, maintain them, protect access, find the money, and build community support.
Randy Hoffbeck brings his own experience. He came to Alaska to work for BLM as a recreation specialist, later served as Parks and Beautification Manager for the Municipality of Anchorage during part of the Mystrom administration, and spent many years on the Eagle River Parks and Recreation Board of Supervisors. So this is something our team has a real connection to.
I have also spent much of my public life supporting responsible resource development. I do not believe recreation and resource development have to be enemies. Alaska needs jobs and economic opportunity. We need to responsibly develop our resources and generate revenues that support public services. We also need to maintain access to the lands and waters that are such a big part of life here.
There will be conflicts. When there are, government needs to work through them thoughtfully rather than treating every land-use question as all or nothing.
Alaska’s outdoors are one of our greatest assets. We should protect access, take care of what we have, and look for sensible opportunities to improve recreation for the people who live here.
Question 2: State support for recreation infrastructure and priorities
Past state investments in outdoor recreation infrastructure have primarily come from the Alaska State Legislature through the Capital Budget. Unfortunately, millions of dollars of that funding were vetoed by the current Governor, including funds needed to match federal funding. What role do you believe state government should play in supporting outdoor recreation infrastructure, programs, and access, and what would be your administration’s priorities for investment?
Tom Begich
Alaska’s trails and parks should not be an afterthought in the capital budget. They are economic infrastructure, the same as a port or road, and I will fund them that way.
Here is a pattern this Governor has repeated more than once. In 2024, the Legislature put $3.7 million into the Alaska Long Trail, the 500-mile trail network that will eventually connect Seward to the Interior. The Governor vetoed all but $1.1 million of it, gutting projects at Flattop, an Indigenous gateway in downtown Anchorage, the Iditarod Trail in Girdwood, and trailhead parking at Arctic Valley. Two years earlier, in 2022, he vetoed $10.5 million that the Legislature had approved for the same trail. Some of that money would have matched federal dollars, which means every state dollar vetoed cost Alaska federal dollars too. That is not fiscal discipline. That is leaving money on the table that Alaskans already earned, twice.
As Governor, I will treat outdoor recreation capital funding as a standing priority in my budget, not a line item to be traded away. My priorities are a multi-year, predictable capital plan for State Parks and trail systems instead of a fight every single session; full state match for every federal recreation and trails dollar on the table, starting with the Alaska Long Trail’s National Scenic Trail designation moving through Congress right now; and direct partnership with the organizations already doing this work on the ground, like the Anchorage Park Foundation, Alaska Trails, and the Mat-Su Trails and Parks Foundation, so state dollars build on what communities have already started rather than duplicating it.
Click Bishop
Our state government has an important responsibility to maintain the public infrastructure that Alaskans rely on. Trails, boat launches, campgrounds, trailheads, public-use cabins, and access roads improve quality of life, support local businesses, and strengthen our visitor economy.
I believe we should make strategic investments that leverage federal matching dollars whenever they provide a good return for Alaska. It makes little sense to leave available funding on the table when it can improve facilities that serve Alaskans for decades.
My administration would prioritize projects that improve public access, address deferred maintenance, enhance safety, and expand year-round recreation opportunities. We will focus on projects that communities support and that can be maintained responsibly over the long term.
Meda DeWitt
State government has a direct responsibility to support outdoor recreation infrastructure. Trails, parks, boat launches, campgrounds, cabins, winter routes, and safe trailheads strengthen local economies, improve health and quality of life, support tourism, and help communities attract and retain workers and families. In Alaska, they are essential public infrastructure.
My conservation work has involved bringing together Indigenous communities, public-land managers, scientists, conservation organizations, and local stakeholders. That experience has shown me that successful stewardship depends on lasting relationships, clear responsibilities, and reliable investment. Communities cannot build durable partnerships around a state government that repeatedly withdraws its support or treats each capital budget as a political bargaining exercise.
My administration would stop treating outdoor recreation projects as expendable. When state matching funds unlock substantially greater federal investment, vetoing those funds is not fiscal restraint. It leaves Alaska money on the table, delays necessary work, increases future construction costs, and weakens communities that have already invested time and resources in developing projects.
The state should provide predictable matching funds, coordinate among agencies, help communities navigate grant programs, and ensure that small and rural communities are not excluded because they lack dedicated grant writers or planning staff. Tribal governments, municipalities, boroughs, nonprofit organizations, foundations, user groups, and responsible businesses should be partners from the beginning.
My administration would establish a statewide outdoor recreation infrastructure plan that evaluates proposed projects according to public safety, deferred maintenance, community support, local readiness, economic and workforce benefits, protection of natural and cultural resources, climate resilience, long-term operating costs, and access for people of different ages and abilities.
We would prioritize trailheads, sanitation, parking, bridges, winter access, accessible routes, cabins, boat launches, water access, and wayfinding. We would also provide more dependable support to trail organizations, ski clubs, cycling groups, Tribal governments, municipalities, parks foundations, and volunteer stewards so successful programs do not have to rebuild themselves every budget cycle.
These investments must extend beyond the road system. Rural and coastal communities need infrastructure that supports subsistence access, cultural continuity, youth programs, public health, local enterprise, and safe travel on the lands and waters surrounding them.
Outdoor recreation should be part of a larger economic strategy in which stewardship and livelihoods reinforce one another. Sustainable tourism, mariculture, fisheries, renewable energy, local guiding, cultural tourism, and value-added businesses all depend on healthy lands, waters, and communities.
Michael Gilbert
Our priorities would be to increase funding for refuges and fisheries in order to increase the amount of subsistence game available for ALL Alaskan’s. Investment if passed shall NOT be veto’d by my administration.
Shelley Hughes
Tourism Creates Jobs in Every Region
- Tourism is one of Alaska’s largest private-sector employers.
- Visitor spending supports small businesses, guides, hotels, restaurants, transportation providers, and local retailers.
- Recreation infrastructure is economic infrastructure.
- Better access translates into longer visitor stays and more local spending.
Resource Development Pays the Bills
- Alaska cannot maintain or expand recreation infrastructure by grants alone.
- Responsible development of oil, gas, mining, timber, and other resources generates the revenue necessary to fund parks, roads, trails, campgrounds, and public access.
- Economic growth and environmental stewardship are not opposing goals.
Recreation and Resource Development Can Coexist
I reject the false choice between responsible resource development and outdoor recreation. Alaska has demonstrated repeatedly that we can develop our resources responsibly while maintaining world-class recreation opportunities and protecting the natural landscapes that attract visitors from around the globe.
State government has an important responsibility to help maintain and expand recreation infrastructure that serves residents, supports local economies, and strengthens Alaska’s tourism industry. Outdoor recreation is an economic asset and an important part of Alaska’s quality of life.
My administration’s first priority will be fixing and maintaining existing assets before building new ones. Too often government focuses on ribbon-cutting projects while existing facilities deteriorate. We need to address deferred maintenance, improve access, and ensure current infrastructure is reliable and safe.
I will prioritize investments that provide broad public benefit: trail systems, access roads, docks, campgrounds, boat launches, public-use cabins, trailheads, parking areas, and facilities that support year-round recreation. Whenever possible, Alaska should leverage federal matching opportunities, public-private partnerships, and local participation to maximize the value of every state dollar.
I also believe tourism and recreation infrastructure are strongest when supported by a healthy private-sector economy. Alaska’s resource industries, including responsible oil, gas, mining, and timber development, remain critical sources of jobs and revenue that help make these investments possible. Resource development and recreation are not mutually exclusive. Done responsibly, both can thrive and support long-term economic growth.
My administration will focus on investments that improve resident access, support community health, strengthen tourism, and deliver measurable economic returns for Alaskans.
Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Unlike our current governor, I firmly believe that the state government should be a catalyst for exciting new investments in building out Alaska’s outdoor recreation infrastructure. This belief mirrors my track record as a legislator: I attended and worked to help support the very first Confluence conference, and championed an appropriation that resulted in the first major new State Parks public-use cabin construction in a decade.
If I am governor, every year you will see bold new proposed investments in outdoor recreation infrastructure: major maintenance on existing recreation assets, new hiking trails, new multi-use trails, a hut-to-hut system (or systems plural), building out the Long Trail, many new public-use cabins across Alaska, new Nordic skiing infrastructure that helps cement Anchorage’s status as the best cross-country skiing city in North America, exploring leveraging AIDEA to finance major new recreation projects (where applicable), and on and on.
I won’t just propose these projects in my budget, I will spend considerable political capital to get them funded and across the line. I also want to propose generational investment in outdoor recreation infrastructure in what I think will be a forthcoming general-obligation (GO) bond package. The last GO bond, in 2012, was $475M. I expect the next one to be ~$750M. I would propose significant, eight-figure investment in recreation infrastructure in that GO bond package.
Hopefully my zeal is jumping off the page. And as our campaign website puts it, I’m running to be Alaska’s Trails & Cabins Governor. I’m highly motivated to realize that ambition.
Henry Kroll
Since we will be invaded by four million tourists this year, I feel it is important to get more money from the Feds to finish the road to Nome and repair the Dalton Highway. Our highways are jammed with traffic between Anchorage and Homer. The pavement between Anchor Point and Homer is in very bad shape. The States should prioritize getting more land and farms into private hands so that the local economies will thrive.
James Parkin
Questions 2-4 are budgetary in nature. I will answer them all for the most part here. I will fund outdoor recreation, tourism and eco-tourism and certainly not veto funds to match federal dollars. To say I will fund your efforts is not enough. You need to know how I will fund you. To have the funds needed for all departments and organizations, I will do the following four things:
- Change the budget from a “spend it or lose it” system to a “save it and make it” system. A savings system will prevent inefficient spending and fraud. Between 1 and 5 billion each year is lost to inefficiency and waste. These losses will continue to increase from year to year if we do not change the system. I will allow departments and organizations to keep budget funds indefinitely. This allows for long-term planning and investment of funds given without reductions on future funding and will allow departments and groups to self-generate money. I cannot overstate how much this paradigm shift in budgeting will change the way we do business in Alaska. Our current system has only one very poor directive (spend everything by June 30 or be punished), no internal checks and balances to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse, and it incentivizes inefficient spending. This new system will replace the poor old directive with S.M.A.R.T directives developed by the people, the governor, and the departments themselves to achieve the highest performance. It will include internal checks and balances to prevent fraud, waste and abuse and increased efficiency via FARs (Feedback Access Reports) and OARs (One-page Accountability Reports) leading to a sustainable self-supporting budget. Our current budget system will never do this. It will continue to cost more. Eventually, we will become a debtor state with ever increasing income taxes just has our nation (with the same “spend it or lose it” budget system) has become. We must change our system! There is much more to be said about this subject. Check my website https://www.jp4gov.org/ and email or call me for more information.
- Return lost funds to the budget by eliminating SB21 (MAPA) and installing an ACES type oil tax structure. We have lost as much as 30 billion in the last 10 years (2 to 3 billion per year) since MAPA has been in force. We must replace it! Doing so will immediately restore adequate funds to balance the budget and return statutory PFDs. With the change to a savings budget and the removal of SB21our state’s savings will begin to grow again.
III. Increase revenue through resource development. Recreation, tourism and eco-tourism are a part of this development as well as oil, mining, timber and fisheries. More than simply opening our state doors to new businesses, we need to do so smartly and creatively. Historically, outside developers have taken our resources for the promise of jobs (<50%) with no shares in the corporate profits, and no control over production or operations. Alaska was able to build an economy on such dismal returns only because of a 300% increase in production. Diminishment of our state’s resources at this rate is not sustainable. We can no longer expect to build a thriving economy on such returns. We need to 1. Negotiate deals that include profit sharing as well as the traditional “promise” of jobs. 2. We need to develop our own Alaska Resource Development Cooperative Corporation (ARDCC). A corporation such as this would give us power in negotiation with outside corporations, take on Alaskan needs projects such as refinery for production and sale of fuel in Alaska to reduce costs, provide 100% jobs for Alaskans, give Alaskans total control over production and operations and would produce dividends for Alaskans that could not be touched by the state legislature. The corporation would not be involved with the PFD funds and would operate independently, like any other corporation but would be controlled by Alaskans.
- Look to the future for our investments and development. I say NO to data centers and YES to Flying Whales, massive helium airships capable of transporting heavy cargo to remote areas, aiming to reduce the carbon footprint of logistics and provide access to regions without infrastructure (no roads or landing fields needed). These new designs leverage helium for safety while exploring green propulsion technologies, including hydrogen fuel cells. Helium airships thus represent a safe, energy-efficient, and versatile form of lighter-than-air aviation, with potential for both commercial and humanitarian applications in the 21st century. With these we will be able to quickly access natural resources that are otherwise inaccessible and do so with less permitting issues in shorter time. Current projects could become available years ahead of time. For example, the current Ambler Road Project will cost us a billion dollars to build a 211-mile road that will cross 20+ salmon streams, and caribou habitat. The road will have to be maintained, and the streams and habitat will have to be monitored. These are costs that eat into our profits. Already, we are having difficulty maintaining the Dalton and other roads in the state. The arguments that these airships would cause a loss of jobs (temporary road construction), or that they are not viable because of Alaska’s harsh climate are unfounded. ARDCC should invest in and develop an airship production facility. We would be on the cutting edge of this technology, make good profits, create jobs for Alaskans only, and protect our environment (a resource that is ever increasing in value and sustainable). Hydrogen energy is another project Alaska should invest in for both in-state power production and export for profit.
With these tools in place, we can advance a sustainable vibrant economy and provide substantial, sustainable budget funding for state programs. We can stop robbing one program to fund another.
Destry Payne
Alaska must get away from Federal funding and get out from under the Federal thumb. Each community can handle outdoor recreation infrastructure in it’s area. For unpopulated areas, the Alaskan people themselves can volunteer to build and manage infrastructure. Some state funding should be available for bridges and barriers for trails and parks. The best way to manage this would be for the communities to plan and execute their will.
Bill Walker
The state has an important role, especially when a relatively modest investment can bring federal dollars into Alaska or leverage contributions from local governments, businesses, foundations, nonprofits, and user groups.
But I also owe people an honest answer about the state’s finances. Until we get our fiscal house in order, parks and recreation are going to compete with schools, roads, public safety, and other basic responsibilities of government. When money is tight, those core services are often going to come first. I may not like that reality, but pretending otherwise does not help parks.
That is one reason our fiscal plan matters to people who care about recreation. If Alaska continues moving from one short-term fix to the next, parks will remain vulnerable, maintenance will be postponed, and opportunities will be missed.
I am particularly concerned about leaving federal money on the table. If a reasonable state match can bring substantially more federal investment into Alaska, we should think very carefully before walking away from it. Not every federal grant makes sense. But when a project meets a real Alaska need and the numbers work, we should compete for those funds.
The same is true of partnerships. If a municipality, tribal organization, business, foundation, nonprofit, or user group is willing to help make a good project happen, the state should look for ways to work with them.
My priorities would be protecting public access, dealing with serious safety and maintenance needs, making the most of outside dollars, and supporting projects that matter to the communities they serve.
Question 3: Long-term funding for Alaska State Parks
Alaska State Parks manages more acreage than any other state park system in the nation. Use of our State Parks continues to grow, benefiting our residents and economy. Chugach State Park, for example, is the most heavily visited public land in Alaska. State Parks budgets have not come close to keeping up with growing use and deferred maintenance challenges. How will your administration ensure that State Parks has the long-term funding for staffing and capital projects to serve residents, support local economies, protect resources, and maintain visitor experiences?
Tom Begich
Chugach State Park sees about 1.5 million visitors a year. It is the most visited public land in Alaska, and it is being run on a budget that has not kept pace with that growth. Alaska’s own budget documents show it takes roughly $3 million a year in sustained investment just to keep deferred maintenance from getting worse, not to catch up. We are not spending that consistently, and the backlog grows every year we don’t.
I will not treat State Parks funding as a one-time fix. I will build a dedicated, multi-year capital stream for State Parks staffing and maintenance, tied to actual visitor use data so the busiest units, Chugach, Denali State Park, and Kachemak Bay, get resourced first. States like Utah and Colorado have shown that a stable funding commitment paired with a real state outdoor recreation office pays for itself many times over in visitor spending and local jobs. Alaska should do the same, and unlike a lot of things this state debates, this one has bipartisan support across rural and urban Alaska.
I will also look at dedicating a portion of visitor-driven revenue, park fees, and cruise-related revenue directly back into the park system that generates it, rather than letting that money disappear into the general fund while the park it came from goes without a ranger. And I will keep front-line, year-round staff in place instead of relying entirely on seasonal hires who can’t build the kind of institutional knowledge Chugach and our other high-use parks need.
Click Bishop
Our State Parks are one of the best investments we can make in Alaska’s future. As visitation continues to grow, we need to ensure our parks remain safe, accessible, and well maintained.
My administration will work with the Legislature to develop a long-term funding strategy that combines predictable capital investment, responsible operating budgets, public-private partnerships, volunteer engagement, and user fees where appropriate and reasonable. Deferred maintenance only becomes more expensive over time, so we need to be proactive rather than reactive.
We’ll also prioritize data-driven planning, so staffing and capital improvements reflect where demand is greatest while protecting the natural resources that make these places special.
Meda DeWitt
Alaska State Parks needs dependable operating support, a stable professional workforce, and a long-term capital plan. We cannot encourage greater use, promote Alaska as a world-class destination, and then fail to fund the sanitation, trail maintenance, staffing, public safety, interpretation, and resource protection required to care for these places.
My administration would begin with a comprehensive assessment of the State Parks system. It would identify staffing gaps, deferred maintenance, high-use pressure points, public-safety concerns, threats to natural and cultural resources, revenue opportunities, and projects ready to proceed. The results would form the basis of a publicly available, multi-year operating and capital plan rather than another year-to-year scramble.
Core staffing and routine maintenance require a reliable general fund base. Major repairs and improvements should be included in a predictable capital program. Alaska should aggressively pursue federal matching funds and enter responsible partnerships with Tribal governments, municipalities, nonprofits, user organizations, and local businesses.
User fees may contribute to the system, but public parks cannot depend on fees alone. Any fee changes should be transparent, reasonably connected to the services being provided, and reinvested in the parks system. We must also ensure that fees do not price low-income Alaskans, young people, or families out of their own public lands.
A functioning parks system also needs enough permanent and seasonal employees to manage busy areas, protect resources, conduct preventive maintenance, support volunteers, resolve conflicts, and give visitors a safe and welcoming experience. Volunteers and nonprofit partners make extraordinary contributions, but they should complement the work of the state rather than compensate for chronic underfunding.
I would also develop locally rooted stewardship and Guardians partnerships within the parks system. Indigenous Guardians programs bring together employment, environmental monitoring, cultural knowledge, visitor education, and care for heritage sites. Similar partnerships could allow Tribal governments and local communities to help monitor changing conditions, protect culturally important places, educate visitors, and build pathways into natural-resource and recreation careers.
For Chugach State Park and other heavily used areas, I would prioritize trailhead capacity, sanitation, parking management, winter maintenance, sustainable trail design, and coordination with emergency responders. In rural and less-developed parks, I would emphasize basic access, cabins, water and sanitation systems, local stewardship employment, and maintenance that serves residents as well as visitors.
Stable funding is less expensive than neglect. When routine maintenance is deferred, small problems become emergencies and repair costs multiply. Preventive maintenance is not an optional expense. It is responsible stewardship and responsible budgeting.
Michael Gilbert
My administration would work with the entities as need be to work out budgets and regulations for the benefit of Alaska and help preserve it’s future.
Shelley Hughes
Alaska’s State Parks system is one of our greatest public assets, yet it faces growing demands and significant maintenance needs. Long-term success requires a sustainable funding strategy rather than relying on unpredictable year-to-year decisions.
My administration will begin by conducting a comprehensive assessment of deferred maintenance, staffing needs, and visitor-use trends. We must have a clear understanding of where limited resources can achieve the greatest impact.
A key part of the solution is creating stronger connections between growing visitation and the funding available to maintain facilities. Revenue generated through park uses, fees, concession opportunities, and tourism partnerships should be evaluated to help support maintenance and visitor services while keeping parks affordable and accessible.
I also believe partnerships will be essential. Local governments, nonprofits, volunteer organizations, user groups, and private-sector partners often possess expertise and resources that can help maintain and improve recreational assets. State government should actively encourage those partnerships.
More broadly, Alaska must grow its economy if we hope to sustain critical public services. Responsible resource development, combined with a growing tourism industry and a stronger private sector, provides the economic foundation needed to support parks, trails, and recreation infrastructure over the long term.
My goal is to ensure State Parks remain accessible, safe, well-maintained, and financially sustainable so future generations can enjoy the same opportunities we enjoy today.
Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
To start with, I wouldn’t veto funding that had been approved for these purposes by the Legislature, like the $1M Gov. Dunleavy vetoed from the 2025 Capital Budget that would have created new trail access and parking for Ram Valley in Chugach State Park. As governor, I would actively work with the legislature to increase funding and address understaffing and deferred maintenance challenges across our park system.
Our state parks have been substantially underfunded for too long. It’s common sense that when the usage load on our parks’ lands and facilities is growing, we need to increase our investment in maintenance and staffing accordingly. In addition to common sense revenue measures like closing the S-corp loophole and requiring out-of-state businesses to pay corporate income tax based on their Alaska-based sales, I’m excited to grow earned-revenue streams for Alaska State Parks. I think few legislators realize that State Parks cabins are net revenue generators. In my mind that makes it only more obvious that we should build more. People love them and they generate revenue that can ultimately flow back to State Parks. Win-win! We can also improve access through better coordination with local governments. For example, Anchorage residents have a 1.000 batting average voting to support improved access and recreation facilities via Chugach Access Service Area (CASA) bonds. We need to make sure state improvements complement this work. I was active as a citizen in the 2026 CASA process, attending many meetings relating to the process and meeting with multiple Anchorage Assembly members, and know firsthand how important the State Parks-Muni relationship is to helping CASA realize its full potential.
Henry Kroll
We need to enlist the help of the Native corporations participate more to help support and protect resources and maintain visitor experiences.
James Parkin
I have told you that I will fund your projects, and I have told you how I will fund your projects. I have not given you vague campaign promises without a way to keep them. When you are funded, I will give you directives for spending the money. Through FARs, your staff, the public and myself will build those directives. You will tell me how you will best use the funds for staffing, capital projects, serve residents, support local economies, maintain visitor experiences and what you will save for long term projects. You are the experts. It is your job to determine how the money will be spent and saved. It is my job to get you the money you need. There will be OARs that will be collected from you and reported to voters. They will know what you have been given and what you have used it for. Voters will receive OARs and FAR’s via direct text messaging and an on-line website. This process works for everyone. Commissioners and other leaders get the feedback they need to run more efficiently and long-term ownership of funds allowing long term planning. Workers have input on operations, spending and job satisfaction. Voters have input on spending, operations, and satisfaction. Direct Access, Accountability, and Transparency (DAAT) like we have never had before!
Destry Payne
Simple. After a full DOGE audit to find and eliminate fraud within the government like why does the state pay $5,000 for an oil change on a state owned truck. Once the fraud is found and stopped, many useless state positions are ended, there will be more than enough funds for improvements and maintenance on parks without robbing the people’s PFD fund.
Bill Walker
I wish there were a simple answer, but there is not. The long-term funding problem facing State Parks is tied directly to the larger fiscal problem facing Alaska.
We cannot create dependable funding for parks, or for many other important services, if every budget cycle starts with the same fights over deficits, savings, the Permanent Fund Dividend, and what gets cut next. It is hard to plan for the long term when the state itself is living year to year.
I am also not going to promise that State Parks can be protected from every future budget challenge. Schools, public safety, transportation, and other essential responsibilities will continue to compete for limited dollars. But that does not mean we should accept a system where maintenance gets postponed until a manageable problem becomes an expensive one.
And this is not just a parks issue. Deferred maintenance is a serious problem across state government. Anyone who has owned a home, a vehicle, or a business understands how this works. Ignore maintenance long enough and you usually pay more in the end.
I would want a clear picture of what we own, what condition it is in, what presents the greatest safety risk, what gets the most use, and where waiting is likely to cost us more later. Then we need to make choices based on those facts.
We should also use more than one funding tool. That can include reasonable user revenues, federal funds, partnerships with local governments, businesses and nonprofits, volunteer organizations, concessions where appropriate, and philanthropic support. Those partnerships are not an excuse for the state to walk away from its responsibilities. They are a way to stretch limited dollars and get more done.
We need to do a better job taking care of the assets Alaskans have already paid for. In many cases, that is also the least expensive thing to do.
Question 4: Future-proof investments in State Parks infrastructure
In addition to funding for deferred maintenance, how will your administration ensure that investments in State Parks both repair aging facilities, and deliver future-proof trailheads, bridges, cabins, sanitation systems, parking areas, revenue collection facilities, winter access, and visitor amenities?
Tom Begich
Fixing what’s broken and building what’s next have to happen together, or we will be back here in ten years with the same backlog and worse facilities. My administration will require that every major State Parks capital project, whether a bridge, cabin, sanitation system, or trailhead, be built to modern, climate-resilient standards the first time, not patched to the old standard and repaired again in five years.
Concretely, that means standardized designs for common facilities like outhouses, bridges, and trailhead kiosks so we are not reinventing engineering every time, the same approach rural Alaska is starting to use for water and sewer systems to lower costs and speed up delivery. It means bundling smaller projects across regions into single contracts rather than one-off jobs that never get built because they’re too small to attract a contractor. It means building winter access and four-season use into new trailhead and parking designs from day one, because Alaskans use these places twelve months of the year, from Nordic skiing at Kincaid to fat biking at Russian Jack. And it means modernizing revenue collection, real fee stations, and digital payment, so State Parks captures the revenue it is owed.
I will also put youth employment crews to work on this. The Anchorage Park Foundation’s youth employment program is already training young Alaskans to build and maintain trails. I will expand that model statewide through an Alaska Conservation Corps model, so we are building a maintenance workforce and future guides and rangers at the same time as we are fixing the backlog.
Click Bishop
Every investment should solve today’s problems while preparing for tomorrow’s needs. That means designing facilities that are durable, easier to maintain, and capable of accommodating increasing use.
We’ll prioritize improvements to trailheads, bridges, public-use cabins, sanitation systems, parking, winter access, and other visitor amenities that improve safety and accessibility while protecting the surrounding environment.
Equally important is listening to the people who know these places best—park managers, local governments, user groups, Alaska Native organizations, volunteers, and outdoor recreation organizations—to ensure investments reflect local priorities and deliver lasting value.
Meda DeWitt
Repairing aging infrastructure is essential, but Alaska must also build for the conditions we know are coming. Park facilities should serve the public for decades, withstand changing environmental conditions, and remain practical for state employees and local partners to operate and maintain.
My administration would incorporate resilience and full life-cycle planning into every major State Parks capital project. Designs should account for heavier use, severe weather, freeze-thaw damage, flooding, erosion, wildfire, permafrost instability, winter access, accessibility, maintenance staffing, replacement parts, energy use, and transportation costs.
Future-proofing also requires us to use all the knowledge available to us. In my conservation work, I have helped connect ecological analysis with Indigenous science and cultural knowledge. The technical assessment of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska to which I contributed examined wildlife and habitat alongside Indigenous lifeways, cultural values, ecosystem intactness, and long-term environmental change. That kind of integrated analysis produces a more complete understanding of a landscape than engineering or biological data alone.
Before approving a major project, my administration would ask whether it improves public safety, lowers long-term operating and maintenance costs, works under actual Alaska weather and ground conditions, expands meaningful access, protects natural and cultural resources, supports local workers and businesses, and reflects input from the people who use, operate, and care for the site.
Accessibility should be incorporated at the beginning of the design process, not added after major decisions have been made. That means recognizing the different needs of urban parks, remote parks, high-use trailheads, cabins, boat launches, and winter recreation areas, and designing appropriate levels of access for each.
Better coordination among agencies is also essential. DNR, DOT&PF, DEC, Fish and Game, public-safety agencies, Tribal governments, local governments, and tourism partners often have responsibilities involving the same places. A trailhead may require highway access, drainage, parking, sanitation, emergency-response planning, communications infrastructure, and a workable payment system. Those needs should be coordinated before construction begins.
I would support standardized, modular, Alaska-tested designs for cabins, toilets, bridges, kiosks, and trail structures where appropriate. Communities should not have to start from zero each time they need basic infrastructure. Proven designs can lower costs, shorten project timelines, simplify permitting, improve access to replacement materials, and make maintenance more manageable.
Park staff, Tribal governments, local residents, user groups, guides, accessibility advocates, first responders, and maintenance workers should have meaningful input early in the process. Their experience can help the state avoid expensive mistakes and build facilities that perform under real Alaska conditions.
Michael Gilbert
My administration will work with the treasury and budget board to ensure these items can be voted on and if approved, that appropriate funding shall be given for said item.
Shelley Hughes
We should not simply repair yesterday’s infrastructure. We need to build facilities that can serve Alaskans and visitors for decades to come.
My administration will emphasize lifecycle planning, durable construction standards, and strategic investment in high-use recreation areas. Projects should be prioritized based on visitor demand, economic impact, safety concerns, and long-term maintenance costs.
When upgrading facilities, we should look beyond immediate repairs and consider how infrastructure can better accommodate growing use. Trailheads, parking facilities, public-use cabins, sanitation systems, bridges, and revenue collection facilities should be designed to withstand Alaska’s climate while reducing long-term operating costs.
We also need greater emphasis on winter recreation. Alaska’s outdoor economy is not limited to summer. Investments that improve winter trail access, grooming capabilities, safety infrastructure, and year-round recreation opportunities can create additional economic activity while serving residents.
Technology can also help improve management. Modern reservation systems, electronic payment options, improved visitor information, and better data collection can increase efficiency and improve the user experience.
Future-proofing means making smart investments today that reduce maintenance costs tomorrow, improve access, and ensure Alaska’s recreation infrastructure continues supporting communities, tourism, and economic growth for years to come.
Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
It starts with partnering with the legislature to increase funding for our state parks. The Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation (DPOR) is full of dedicated and talented staff who are capable of delivering upgraded facilities and access that will last well into the future if we provide them the resources to do so, but we haven’t for decades.
In addition, I’d appoint a director of DPOR and a commissioner of DNR with deep experience in outdoor recreation issues, so we have the right people at the top of the agencies to get the job done. In my opinion, many of the impressive leaders of the organizations sponsoring this questionnaire would be ideal candidates for DPOR director — which is to say, Alaskans who know outdoor recreation issues inside and out and would have the expertise and the drive to effect rapid progress.
Henry Kroll
The State of Alaska has 1999 buildings and is building more clinics and other buildings. At the present time there is a maintenance shortfall of $725,800,000.00. The roofs of fire stations, police stations and office buildings will start to leak soon. Furnaces will quit in the middle of the winter and pipes will freeze causing extensive samage. My AI research indicated that it takes at least two-hundred million dollars each year to maintain all those buildings. The Attwood Tower in Anchorage alone requires and maintenance of just under five million dollars. The University of Alaska has 380 building and we are paying for the maintenance of thos buildings. If I were Governor I would deed all 380 of those building to the University corporation and let the “smart people” maintain their own buildings. The U od A is a land grant college. They need to build or lease their land for motor home parks and other things to raise money. The State Government should not be giving hundreds of millions of dollars to a University with little or no accreditation.
I would consolidate some of the 17,000 employees working for the Executive branch because some are only working three or four hours a day. I would sell half the office buildings to realist ate developers and rent offices from the new owners. The money would to into the General Fund. This would save the State millions on maintenance fees. The Atwood Tower I would sell to Donald Trump for a hotel or some other hotel chain. If offices are needed in that building, the State could rent them for $2000 a month instead of paying for millions in elevator repair, h-vack systems, snow removal, window washing, painting, plumbing and other maintenance.
James Parkin
By allowing departments to keep the money that is given to them each year to invest and plan for future needs without any reduction in future funds for saving. Departments will be able to build their own reserves and plan for future needs. Imagine a budget system that incentivizes thrift, saving, investing, and planning instead of our current budget system of spending every dime every year with no thought for the future? The new budget system just makes more sense! Departments and organizations will not only have their yearly budget funds but additionally they will have access to savings from previous years.
Destry Payne
In conjunction with the last answer, end the fraud within the government, there will be more than enough funding without having to charge fees and pay someone to handle revenue collection and maintain collection facilities.
Bill Walker
I do not want to spend money replacing yesterday’s infrastructure with a brand-new version of yesterday’s infrastructure.
If we are rebuilding a trailhead, bridge, cabin, sanitation system, parking area, or visitor facility, we should think about how it will actually be used 10, 20, or 30 years from now. Is visitation increasing? Is the area being used more in winter? Can the facility be maintained efficiently? Can it handle Alaska weather? Are we building something that looks affordable today but will be expensive to operate for decades?
I have spent enough time around public budgets to know that the cheapest project to build is not always the cheapest project to own. We need to pay attention to the full cost over time—durability, maintenance, energy use, snow management, sanitation, accessibility, and technology. Where user fees are appropriate, we should make them easy and efficient to collect.
We also need to listen to the people closest to these facilities. Park staff know where the problems are. So do local communities, tribal organizations, search and rescue personnel, trail groups, motorized and nonmotorized users, businesses, and nonprofit partners. Sometimes government spends a lot of time studying a problem that the people using and maintaining a facility already understand very well.
When federal programs or partnerships can help us replace aging infrastructure with something more durable and better suited to future needs, we should make a serious effort to bring those dollars to Alaska.
Question 5: Recreation on general state lands managed by DMLW
Much of Alaska’s outdoor recreation takes place on general state lands managed by the Division of Mining Land and Water (DMLW). This agency has no recreation staff and no mechanism to manage recreation, maintain recreation resources or enhance recreation opportunities. How will your administration work to promote, protect and enhance recreation on general state lands?
Tom Begich
The Division of Mining, Land and Water (DMLW) manages more than 165 million acres of Alaska, and right now it has no recreation staff, no permitting requirement for most commercial recreation activities on that land, and no real way to track how much use is happening or where. DNR’s own reporting acknowledges it doesn’t have the data it needs to manage this well. That is not a small gap. Most of Alaska’s outdoor recreation is happening on land the state is not actually managing for recreation at all.
I will fix this in two ways. First, I will establish a dedicated recreation coordination function within DMLW, staffed and funded, so general state lands receive the same basic management attention that State Parks land gets. Second, I will require registration, not heavy permitting, for commercial guiding and outfitting operations on general state land, so the state finally has real data on where people are recreating and what pressure those areas are under, without putting new burdens on an individual Alaskan out for a hike or a fishing trip. States like Utah and Colorado built statewide offices of outdoor recreation to coordinate exactly this kind of cross-agency gap. Alaska should build the DMLW piece of that same coordination, so recreation on general lands isn’t managed by accident.
Click Bishop
General state lands are managed for multiple uses, and recreation deserves a stronger voice in that process. My administration will review how recreation planning can be better integrated into land management decisions while respecting the multiple-use mission of these lands.
I support improving coordination between the Division of Mining, Land and Water, Alaska State Parks, local governments, outdoor recreation organizations, user groups, and Alaska Native organizations to identify priorities, improve access, reduce user conflicts, and maintain recreation infrastructure.
We don’t necessarily need more bureaucracy—we need better coordination, better planning, and stronger partnerships.
Meda DeWitt
General state lands include some of Alaska’s most important recreation, cultural, and subsistence-access areas, yet recreation is often treated as incidental in their management. When people regularly use these lands for hunting, fishing, berry picking, snowmachining, skiing, biking, boating, climbing, camping, guiding, cultural activities, and access to subsistence areas, the state has a responsibility to understand and manage that use.
My work in conservation has taught me that public lands cannot be managed effectively as empty areas on a map. They are living homelands, food systems, watersheds, migration corridors, cultural landscapes, economic assets, and places where people maintain relationships and responsibilities stretching back generations.
My administration would establish dedicated recreation capacity within the Division of Mining, Land and Water, supported by a clearly accountable interagency outdoor recreation office. Its purpose would be practical coordination and problem-solving, not bureaucracy for its own sake.
The state would begin by working with communities to identify and map high-use recreation areas and trail systems, traditional and subsistence-access routes, water-access points and boat launches, parking and sanitation needs, areas of environmental or cultural sensitivity, public-safety concerns, emerging user conflicts, and access threatened by land disposals, development, or changing conditions.
The IMAGO Initiative demonstrated the value of taking land-management discussions out of conference rooms and onto the land itself. I would apply that principle to state lands by convening site-based planning processes with Tribal governments, local communities, user groups, land managers, guides, scientists, conservation organizations, and businesses. Management decisions improve when participants can see the landscape, understand its uses, hear its history, and build relationships with one another.
Communities and user groups should have a transparent process for proposing improvements, identifying access concerns, and participating in management decisions. The state should be able to enter durable maintenance and stewardship agreements with Tribal governments, municipalities, nonprofits, recreation organizations, and other qualified local partners.
Recreation, cultural use, and public access must be considered early in land disposals, leases, easements, permitting decisions, and development proposals. Waiting until a trail, water-access point, or traditional route is threatened creates avoidable conflict and leaves the state with fewer options.
My administration would protect traditional and subsistence access and ensure that Indigenous knowledge, cultural sites, harvest areas, and community relationships to the land are respected. Tribal consultation must occur while proposals can still be changed, not after the important decisions have already been made.
Where uses overlap, the state should work with local users to address conflicts through route planning, signage, education, seasonal management, and clear public information. Decisions should be grounded in public safety, ecological sustainability, community knowledge, and the actual conditions of each place.
General state lands belong to the people of Alaska. Managing them responsibly means protecting access, caring for the land, responding to growing use, and creating opportunities for recreation and locally rooted economic activity without sacrificing the natural and cultural systems that make those places valuable.
Michael Gilbert
Our administration would create a new board to seperatly deal with these issues.
Shelley Hughes
Many Alaskans recreate on general state lands, yet recreation often receives little attention in land management decisions. My administration will work to better integrate recreation planning into the management of state lands while respecting multiple-use principles.
Responsible multiple-use management remains the right approach for Alaska. Recreation, resource development, conservation, access, and public use can coexist when planning is done thoughtfully and transparently.
I support evaluating ways to strengthen recreation expertise within the Division of Mining, Land and Water. Recreation users, local communities, tourism operators, hunters, anglers, and outdoor organizations should have a stronger voice in planning processes affecting public access and recreational opportunities.
My administration will also focus on improving access. Many recreation opportunities are limited not by a lack of land, but by inadequate access, poor information, or insufficient infrastructure. Strategic investments in trails, signage, public access corridors, boat launches, and parking areas can significantly improve recreation opportunities.
We should actively identify opportunities where recreation investments can support local economies and create jobs, particularly in rural communities that benefit from outdoor tourism and visitor spending.
By taking a balanced approach that respects multiple uses of state lands, Alaska can expand recreation opportunities while continuing to support economic growth and responsible resource development.
Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Our administration would treat recreation on general state lands as a core land-management responsibility, not a side activity. Alaska already sets statewide recreation goals through the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) process. As governor, when it comes to general state lands, my job will be to align DMLW towards those goals and make sure the division keeps its outdoor recreation obligations — not just its mining or resource-development work — front of mind. For example, this would include ensuring the SCORP goals are factored into Area Plans and Management Plans by the Resource Assessment and Development Section of DMLW.
I also think the solution comes down to people. I will appoint a DMLW director who has a healthy appreciation for Alaskans’ love for outdoor recreation, and I will do the same for the DNR commissioner. Ultimately, having a DNR commissioner who shares my vision for making Alaska a national outdoor-recreation leader can in turn help mediate any issues that arise within DMLW.
Henry Kroll
We definitely will need more police and or Fish and wildlife personnel to protect our moose and other wild life. I propose to let the Native Corporations manage their own wildlife like they have done for thousands of years in the past. This would free up more State Troopers and Fish and wildlife personnel to advise tourists not to shoot everything on sight. Some Native corporations already have hotels and remote lodges on their land and are actively participating in the tourist industry.
We will have to increase our law enforcement. We also need to sell or trade land to the private sector to increase the number of farms. If more Alaskans had farms and land we would have more food security and the privates sector could charge tourists to park on their land and harvest fish from there lakes.
James Parkin
It sounds like your organizations need to get together and find a solution to this situation. I will facilitate this discussion, and the implementation of the solutions found.
Destry Payne
By asking for volunteers to step up to perform the duties.
Bill Walker
This is important because much of what Alaskans think of as outdoor recreation does not happen inside a formal park boundary. It happens on general state lands—on trails, rivers, winter routes, access corridors, hunting and fishing areas, and places that may never have been formally developed as recreation sites.
DMLW also has a very broad job. It deals with land management, access, permitting, resource development, and many different demands on state land. I strongly support responsible resource development, and I do not think the answer is to treat all general state lands as parks.
But we should not ignore what is actually happening on the ground. Recreation is already taking place on these lands, and in some areas use is significant and growing. If we ignore it, we can end up with access conflicts, sanitation problems, resource damage, safety concerns, and more expensive problems later.
I would start with better coordination. DMLW, State Parks, Fish and Game, local governments, tribal organizations, federal land managers, and recreation groups should be talking about where use is growing and where problems are emerging. We should identify the highest-use areas and ask a basic question: is there something relatively modest we can do now that prevents a much bigger problem later?
I would also be open to practical ways of bringing recreation expertise into decisions about heavily used general state lands. That does not automatically mean creating a new bureaucracy. It might mean sharing expertise between agencies, interagency agreements, targeted positions supported by outside funds, cooperative management, or partnerships with local governments and nonprofits.
I believe in multiple use. Resource development, recreation, public access, subsistence, and other uses can coexist in many places. But multiple use works better when we acknowledge what is actually happening on the land and deal with conflicts before they become crises.
Question 6: Outdoor recreation as essential community infrastructure
Many Alaskans increasingly view outdoor recreation not as an industry or tourism asset, but as essential community infrastructure that supports health, economic opportunity, cultural continuity, youth development, and quality of life. To what extent do you agree with that perspective, and how would it influence your administration’s policies and investments?
Tom Begich
I agree with that, without hedging. Alaska’s trails, rivers, and public lands are not an amenity we add once the budget has room. They are core infrastructure, the same as our roads, schools, and clinics, and I will fund and staff them that way.
Alaska has spent a decade watching working families leave the state. Outdoor recreation is one of the clearest reasons people choose to stay or choose to come here to build a life. Outdoor recreation is 5.3 percent of Alaska’s GDP, second in the nation behind only Hawaii. That is not a hobby industry. That is a jobs and retention strategy hiding in plain sight. It’s also how our kids grow up here. Programs like Junior Nordic at the Nordic Skiing Association of Anchorage, the Alaska Off-Road Cycling Alliance’s youth mountain bike programs, and the Anchorage Park Foundation’s youth employment crews are building the next generation of Alaskans who know these places belong to them and are worth staying for.
As Governor, this means outdoor recreation gets a seat at the table in economic development planning, workforce planning, and public health strategy, not just in the Department of Natural Resources budget. Alaskans first means giving Alaskans the trails, parks, and rivers that make this a place worth building a life in.
Click Bishop
Investments in recreation infrastructure are investments in Alaska’s people and communities. Maintaining trails, parks, public access, and recreation facilities isn’t just about tourism—it’s about making Alaska a place where families want to live, businesses want to invest, and future generations can enjoy the same opportunities we have today.
A strong outdoor recreation system complements my broader vision of making Alaska the Next Generation State by improving quality of life, supporting local economies, and ensuring our public lands remain accessible and well cared for for generations to come.
Stopping at state park facilities along our highways has become embarrassing and disgusting. The bathrooms are so filthy inside, so people are doing their business in the ditch and trees. Unacceptable.
As governor, I should be able to stop at a wayside bathroom and be confident my grandchildren can use the bathroom. What message are we sending visitors to our state when they see the condition of these facilities? If nothing else, let’s start with clean bathrooms.
Meda DeWitt
I strongly agree. Outdoor recreation is not separate from community life in Alaska. It is part of how we stay healthy, raise our children, maintain cultural and subsistence practices, build local economies, and remain connected to one another and to the places we call home.
A trail can be transportation, a classroom, a gathering place, a tourism asset, and a route to traditional harvesting areas. A boat launch can support families, commercial and subsistence fishing, guides, emergency response, and small businesses. A community ski trail, recreation center, cabin, or park can give young people a safe place to belong while improving physical and mental health for residents of every age.
That is why my administration would treat outdoor recreation infrastructure as essential community infrastructure. It should be considered alongside roads, schools, public safety facilities, and other investments that make communities healthy, livable, and economically resilient.
This perspective would influence both how projects are evaluated and where state resources are directed. State investment decisions should consider public health, youth development, cultural continuity, workforce recruitment, local economic opportunity, accessibility, and the needs of residents throughout the year. Economic value should not be measured only by visitor spending. We must also recognize the savings and long-term benefits that come from healthier people, stronger communities, engaged young people, and reliable access to subsistence and cultural activities.
My administration would prioritize projects developed with communities rather than imposed upon them. Tribal governments, municipalities, schools, health organizations, youth programs, recreation groups, Elders, local businesses, and residents should help identify what their communities need. In one place, the priority may be a trail or safe walking route. In another, it may be a boat launch, warming shelter, community cabin, winter grooming program, or access to traditional harvesting areas.
We would also work to make outdoor opportunities more accessible. Cost, disability, lack of transportation, inadequate facilities, and limited access to equipment prevent many Alaskans from participating. State policy should support accessible facilities, youth programs, community equipment libraries, safe routes, and partnerships that lower those barriers.
Outdoor recreation investments should create local employment whenever possible. Construction, maintenance, guiding, grooming, environmental monitoring, visitor education, and stewardship can all provide jobs and workforce pathways. Indigenous Guardians and similar locally based programs can connect employment with cultural knowledge, resource protection, and community leadership.
Healthy communities require places where people can move, gather, learn, harvest, heal, and build relationships. Investing in outdoor recreation is an investment in Alaska’s people, our cultures, our economy, and our ability to remain strong for generations to come.
Michael Gilbert
If it improves Alaska, our administration are all for it!
Shelley Hughes
I strongly agree that outdoor recreation should be viewed as essential community infrastructure. Parks, trails, playgrounds, access corridors, campgrounds, and recreational facilities are not luxuries. They contribute directly to public health, youth development, economic opportunity, and community well-being.
For Alaska families, outdoor spaces provide affordable opportunities for recreation, physical activity, and family connection. For young people, they offer places to learn, explore, and develop lifelong skills. For seniors, they support active lifestyles and social engagement. Strong communities benefit from having places where residents can gather, recreate, and enjoy Alaska’s unique outdoor environment.
These assets also have clear economic value. Communities with quality recreation opportunities are more attractive to families, businesses, workers, and visitors. Outdoor recreation supports tourism, strengthens local economies, and helps communities attract and retain residents.
That perspective would influence my administration’s investment decisions by ensuring recreation infrastructure is considered alongside other important public assets. We should evaluate recreation projects not only for tourism benefits, but also for their impact on health, community vitality, and economic development.
At the same time, these investments must be supported by a healthy economy. Growing Alaska’s private sector and responsibly developing our natural resources will provide the revenues needed to build and maintain the infrastructure that helps communities thrive.
A stronger economy, stronger communities, and greater access to Alaska’s outdoors all work together. My administration will pursue policies that advance all three goals.
Outdoor recreation is both community infrastructure and economic infrastructure. It improves health, strengthens families, provides opportunities for youth, and enhances quality of life. At the same time, it supports thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in economic activity. My administration will treat recreation investments as part of a larger economic strategy that grows tourism, supports local businesses, retains Alaska families, and attracts new residents. Achieving those goals requires a strong economy, which is why I will aggressively pursue responsible resource development to generate the revenues needed to maintain and improve the outdoor assets that make Alaska unique.
Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
I couldn’t agree more. Arguably, the outdoors are what drew my parents to Alaska. It is commonly cited that Anchorage’s trail system might be its single biggest selling point. We frequently see across the country and even the world that the towns and cities that offer high-quality outdoor-recreation opportunities are the places that are thriving economically.
For me, outdoor recreation investments are an investment in Alaska’s future and the Alaska I want to see. It grows our economy, helps recruit and retain workforce, makes us healthier and happier… honestly, the question should be why would we not aggressively make dramatic investments in outdoor recreation?
Obviously, that’s rhetorical; I don’t think there is a compelling answer to the question. My mission as governor would be to make Alaska a national leader in making bold investments in outdoor recreation infrastructure, and I can’t wait to work with your all’s organizations to do it.
Henry Kroll
We are expecting close to four million this year. This is due to several factors like heat waves in the lower forty-eight and more retired people. In the most recent comprehensive economic impact data released by the Alaska Travel Industry Association (ATIA), tourism generated $3.9 billion in direct visitor spending and produced a $5.6 billion total economic output for the state.
Many of the tourists come here to catch and process salmon to take back home to feed family and friends. Our salmon resource has limitations. We can’t continue giving our fish away.
As far as youth development goes, I am of the opinion that the majority of the people who come to Alaska are retired folks with money or poor campers. The poor campers will contribute little or nothing to the State economy. A certain percentage of them are escaping from crimes in the lower forty-eight and they think they can hide out in the vast wilderness of Alaska. Some carry guns and 9mm pistols. Some think that Alaska is the land of the free and they can shoot at anything that moves. We might need to pass out pamflets and other educational material at the boarder to explain that Alaska has laws. I would advise residents to wear bullet proof vests when hunting.
First of all we have to get more land and farms here in Alaska to allow tourists to park their motorhomes and camp. Alaskans are in danger of starving if something should happen to the food supply in the lower forty-eight. I propose to trade dividend checks for one acrea of land to increase individual land ownership. This would allow mor money to stay in the PFD. Alaska has over three million lakes. People with lakes on their property should build small docks for people to catch fish. State Fish and Game should stock 100,000 lakes with native fish like grayling and trout to take the pressure off the salmon runs. I have a list of 19 fish that are native to Alaska.
We need to finish the road to Nome that was surveyed in 1948. This would open up more land for recreational prospecting, hunting and other outdoor activities. In the future this road would allow Alaskans to trade with Russia. A ferry system or tunnel may be constructed in the future when the stupid war is over. Tourists might like to ride the Siberian Express when the Russians get over their lust for land and resources.
We definitely need more roads and RV parks. Tourism is not going away.
James Parkin
As a resident of Southeast Alaska, I have seen in Juneau how tourism can negatively impact community infrastructure, health, culture, youth and quality of life. I do believe that tourism does not have to negatively impact communities. Community members are the best resources for preventing problems. I have seen when community input has been disregarded because of money interests. For these reasons I would require direct community input via FARs and compliance with the communities’ responses to the FARs via OARs. Both would be required for funding. There are many success stories and failures to look for guidance. Let’s use them as guides to do it correctly. What good is it if we gain money but lose the beauty that is Alaska?
Destry Payne
Administration policies should be modified for more outdoor events for our youth to participate in like the Johnny Appleseed Program I have on my website. Indoor skating, dancing, nature training, and what ever else the people in the communities wish to have.
Bill Walker
I agree with that perspective. In Alaska, outdoor recreation is much more than a tourism product or an industry category. A trail may be a place to exercise, a route to school, access to hunting or fishing, or simply a place where a family spends time together. A park may be a playground, a gathering place, a community event space, and one of the things that makes a neighborhood a good place to live. A boat launch, cabin, ski trail, or winter route may mostly serve local residents while also supporting visitors and local businesses.
For many Alaskans, the outdoors are also tied to culture, food, family, and community.
I have seen the value of recreation from several angles. I grew up in Valdez. Donna spent part of her career building parks and recreation opportunities there. Randy came to Alaska as a BLM recreation specialist and later managed parks and beautification for the Municipality of Anchorage and served for years on the Eagle River Parks and Recreation Board of Supervisors. Sowhen people say recreation infrastructure matters to quality of life, I understand what they mean.
I also understand why people get frustrated when parks and recreation always seem to be near the back of the funding line. The hard truth is that until Alaska gets its fiscal house in order, schools, public safety, roads, and other essential services will often come first when unrestricted state dollars are scarce.
That is not an argument for neglecting recreation. It is an argument for fixing the larger fiscal problem and being smarter with the resources we have in the meantime.
We should protect federal matching opportunities, work with businesses and nonprofits that want to help, encourage local partnerships, and maintain the assets we already own before they deteriorate beyond repair. Sometimes a fairly modest investment in a trail, park, access point, or community recreation facility can make a big difference.
Outdoor recreation is part of what makes Alaska a great place to live. We should treat it that way, while also being honest about what we can afford and working to give Alaska more choices in the future.
