Attorney General Burns recently told legislators that it is a misperception that Alaska is "anti-federal government" ("Budget raised to fight species designations," ADN, Feb. 15). Why would anyone think we were anti-fed?

Despite this nation's policy since 1973 (and the law) to prevent endangered species from going extinct, Alaska has fought every major species designation and critical habitat proposal from wolves in the Tongass National Forest, to Cook Inlet beluga whales to polar bears in the Arctic. Our legal arguments ignored or distorted biological facts and placed resource development ahead of species recovery.

We've challenged federal authority by bullying the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to shoot wolves in national wildlife refuges--in direct conflict with federal mandates. We've removed buffers for wolves near Denali National Park despite Park Service requests to expand them. We've shot wolves living mainly on Yukon-Charley national preserve lands, including radio-collared animals used for research.

These examples only deal with wildlife. What about efforts to strip EPA of authority to deal meaningfully with issues like pollution from Pebble mine and it's impact on a world-class fishery?

Alaska anti-fed? Nah.

-- Vic Van Ballenberghe