Monday, October 13, 2025
Home Blog Page 7

Wyatt Nelson: Standing Up for What I Believe, Repealing Ranked-Choice Voting

20

by WYATT YOUNG NELSON

I was extremely saddened when I heard that Charlie Kirk had been assassinated. He, like I, feel we have to stand up for what we believe.  Sadly, Charlie lost his life doing just that. As a young man from a political family, I have been involved in political efforts most of my adult life. I especially admired Charlie Kirk and his devotion to what he believed.  He didn’t just talk about his beliefs; he stood up for them.

I was born and raised in Anchorage, Alaska, and I’m a proud volunteer with Repeal Now AK, a nonpartisan organization made up of Alaskans from all political backgrounds who are united in a common cause: to oppose ranked-choice voting (RCV) and restore traditional voting in our state.

As part of this grassroots movement, I’ve been collecting signatures from registered voters to place a repeal measure on the 2026 ballot. While working on this campaign, I, and other volunteers have experienced harassment, intimidation, and even physical assault from opponents of the repeal effort—just for exercising our right to collect signatures and advocate for change. It is disgraceful that anyone would respond to peaceful civic engagement with threats and violence. I condemn these acts in the strongest terms.

An example of what damage rank choice voting can do is the city of Minneapolis.  They adopted ranked-choice voting in 2009 and first used it in their 2013 municipal elections. That year, there were 35 candidates for mayor on the ballot. The election required 33 rounds of vote counting and redistribution, which took weeks before a winner—Betsy Hodges—was declared. Even then, she was elected without receiving a majority of the vote.

Many voters were confused by the complex system. Ballots were discarded due to errors, and others were “exhausted”—meaning votes were thrown out after several rounds because no remaining candidates were ranked. Voters found themselves forced to rank people they didn’t know, support, or agree with politically. Since then, Minneapolis has consistently had some of the lowest voter turnout rates in its municipal elections.

We’ve seen similar problems here in Alaska since adopting RCV: voter confusion, high costs, and a general sense of frustration. This experiment has not worked. It’s expensive—costing millions of dollars—and with our state already facing financial strain, continuing this system risks further economic damage.

We are simply citizens standing up for a fair, understandable, and affordable voting system, just like Charlie Kirk. We ask opponents to listen, consider the consequences, and do what’s right for the people of Alaska.

Wyatt Young Nelson was born in Anchorage but lived in Nome until moving back to Anchorage where he graduated from Bartlett High School and then attended the ACE/ACT program.  He was named after the famous Wyatt Earp and his middle name Young is from his grandfather the late Congressman Don Young. He has been involved in both efforts to repeal ranked-choice voting.

Dunleavy Responds to Alaska Legislative Council, Welcomes Court Clarification

3

By BRENDA JOSEPHSON

Gov. Dunleavy responds to Alaska Legislative Council’s allocation of $100,000 to fund a lawsuit challenging his Executive Order to establish a Department of Agriculture.

In a letter dated September 15, 2025, addressed to Senate President Gary Stevens and House Speaker Bryce Edgmon, Dunleavy outlined his stance, on why he declined to withdraw the executive order to establish a Department of Agriculture emphasizing the lack of clear constitutional restrictions on his authority.

The letter states that on August 2, 2025—the first day of the First Special Session of the 34th Legislature—Dunleavy transmitted the executive order to elevate the Division of Agriculture, currently within the Department of Natural Resources, into a cabinet-level agency. He noted that the legislature failed to disapprove the order, and on August 18, 2025, Stevens and Edgmon requested its voluntary withdrawal, arguing it had been previously rejected and that the constitution does not permit executive orders during special sessions.

Dunleavy responded, “I declined to withdraw the Order because it is not clear to me that the Alaska Constitution limits the time when a governor may issue an Executive Order pursuant to Article III, Section 23.”

He further contends that the constitution does not explicitly grant the legislature authority to disapprove an executive order in any manner beyond the process outlined in Section 23, which requires a joint session vote. Since no such vote occurred during the special session, Dunleavy maintained that the order remains valid.

The governor acknowledged the dispute, stating, “There clearly exists a disagreement between the Executive and Legislative branch as to the governor’s ability to introduce an Executive Order in a special session.” He added, “When such a dispute exists, it is appropriate to seek clarification from the courts. Because the legislature has now chosen to expend limited fiscal resources on outside counsel and pursue litigation, I can only surmise that the legislature shares my view of the importance of having the court provide clarification regarding this constitutional question. I welcome that clarification for the benefit of future governors and legislatures.”

This response follows the Alaska Legislative Council’s September 10, 2025, 9-2 vote to allocate up to $100,000 in taxpayer funds for a lawsuit challenging the order, with Reps. Chuck Kopp (R-Anchorage) and Mike Prax (R-North Pole) dissenting. The order, first issued on December 20, 2024, and rejected 32-28 in March 2025 over cost concerns, was reintroduced during the August special session focused on education funding, prompting the current legal challenge.

The lawsuit, likely to involve Anchorage-based firm Stoel Rives, aims to determine if legislative inaction equates to approval. Prax has argued the legal basis is weak, advocating for dialogue over litigation, aligning with Dunleavy’s reference to constitutional ambiguity.

See our prior coverage:

Alaska Legislative Council allocates $100,000 to sue Gov. Dunleavy over Ag Dept Executive Order.

Brenda Josephson is a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska. You can contact her via email at [email protected].

Mike Dunleavy: A Tribute to Charlie Kirk and the First Amendment

31

By GOV. MIKE DUNLEAVY

Throughout the history of the United States there have been moments of national loss that remind us of the values that bind us together as Americans. Today, I write this as not only your governor, but as a citizen of our great country who is mourning the passing of Charlie Kirk. He was a son, husband, and father of two small children whose life was cut short by an act of senseless violence. Yet his courage and the life he lived must call each of us to a higher standard of civic responsibility.

Charlie was a fierce defender of the First Amendment. Free speech was not an abstract principle to him, but a lived commitment. He understood that the right to speak freely, to debate, and to disagree without fear is not merely one freedom among many. It is the cornerstone on which our country was built, the very framework that allows every other freedom to exist. This God-given right and the others detailed in the Constitution separates America from the rest of the world. Tragically, Charlie paid the ultimate price reminding us of its importance.

From a very young age, Charlie recognized that we all have the responsibility to engage in civil dialogue. He did not choose safe ground or sympathetic audiences. Instead, he visited college campuses where he knew his ideas would be challenged, sometimes shouted down. He believed that truth must be spoken in every place, not just the comfortable ones, inviting those who disagreed with him to the front of the line so that he could give them an opportunity to disagree with him.

Kirk had an uncommon courage, rooted not in anger or resentment, but in principle. He willingly entered the arena of ideas even when hostility was certain because he believed in America’s founding ideals with a conviction that could not be shaken. He believed that our Constitution was not a relic to be ignored, but a living guarantee that ensures every voice, every faith, and every idea has the right to be heard. He demonstrated courage not by shouting people down but by his refusal to be silent when silence would have been easier.

Charlie believed that rational debate was not something to be feared but embraced. For Alaska, and for America, spreading this message could not come at a more critical time. Too often, we see neighbors treating each as enemies and the public square has been replaced with online shouting matches that solve nothing.

You couldn’t watch Charlie’s approach to a conversation without recognizing that it was special. He challenged people with grace to think critically about their beliefs. He often silenced his own supporters when they were being rude to a person with an opposing point of view. He was a model example of how to live his faith as a Christian, while fighting for the truth in the world.

Charlie never pretended that all Americans would agree about everything. Instead, he showed us that differences can be confronted with kindness, honesty, and civility. By his approach, he left behind a challenge to all of us: if you believe in something, speak it. If you disagree, do so with respect. And never allow fear of criticism or retaliation to keep you from standing firm in your convictions.

We must commit ourselves, as Alaskans and as Americans, to this same principle. The First Amendment is not a partisan value. It does not belong to one party or one ideology. It belongs to every citizen, whether conservative, liberal, or independent. It belongs to every faith and every background. When one voice is silenced, all voices are threatened.

As governor, I pledge to do everything I can to protect the First Amendment in Alaska. Whether in our schools, our universities, or our community halls, free speech must not only be protected but encouraged. We will not shy away from difficult conversations, and we will not silence those we disagree with. We will show America that dialogue is possible, even in disagreement, and that civility is not weakness but strength.

To honor Charlie, let us not simply mourn his loss, but also rise to the standard he set. Let us reject the temptation to retreat into silence or tribalism. We must recommit ourselves to protecting the First Amendment. We must teach our children that disagreement is not dangerous and that they should have the courage to face opposing points of view with conviction and grace.

Charlie Kirk’s time with us was too short, but his example will endure. May we in Alaska, and across this nation, live up to his example. May we guard the First Amendment with the same boldness that he carried into every room. Let’s honor Charlie Kirk by promoting what we all should believe that America is at its best when we are free to speak, debate, and seek truth together.

Governor Mike Dunleavy, 12th governor of Alaska.

Ombudsman Complaint Exposes Overpayments from Alaska Housing Finance Corporation

7

By BRENDA JOSEPHSON

An Anchorage landlord has filed a complaint with the Alaska State Ombudsman, raising serious concerns about the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation’s (AHFC) Housing Voucher Program.

The landlord’s issues include frequent overpayments made to landlords, insufficient recovery processes for these overpayments, and AHFC’s alleged noncompliance with the Alaska Landlord Tenant Act (ALTA).

In correspondence with the Ombudsman’s office, the landlord reported that their AHFC tenants had issues with overpayments, amounting to $10,068 for one tennant. The landlord alleges that with over 4,000 tenants in AHFC’s program, such errors may suggest systemic problems, could potentially cost the agency hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in losses.

The complaint further contends that AHFC’s methods for recovering overpayments—often agency errors—can leave landlords with losses or the losses of public funds, especially if they were unaware of the overpayments. Additionally, they claim AHFC does not follow ALTA’s notification requirements, such as providing a full calendar month’s written notice for significant changes like rent adjustments or termination of assistance.

While AHFC asserts that it is not obligated to follow ALTA since it is not referenced in the landlord-tenant rental agreement. The landlord disputes this claim, emphasizing that AHFC’s 12-page contract with landlords and tenants plays a crucial role in the rental process.

In response, the intake assistant from the Ombudsman’s office requested additional documentation, specifically the landlord’s Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contract, to facilitate further investigation.

The Ombudsman’s office noted that it typically does not investigate systemic issues unless multiple complaints are received. The landlord expressed frustration and suggested that others might hesitate to file complaints against a large state agency. They also inquired about which government entity could investigate if they choose not to pursue the matter.

The complaint requests an audit of the accounting practices of AHFC’s Housing Voucher Program, a review of its compliance with ALTA, and a resolution. The Ombudsman’s office has kept the complaint open while awaiting additional documentation.

For more information on filing complaints with the Alaska State Ombudsman, contact  (907) 269-5290 or (907) 465-4970 or email [email protected].

Brenda Josephson is a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska. You can contact her via email at [email protected].

Editors note, clarification on parties of lost funds.

Alaska Legislative Council allocates $100,000 of taxpayer funds to sue Gov. Dunleavy over Ag Dept. Executive Order

14

By BRENDA JOSEPHSON

The Alaska Legislative Council voted 9-2 on September 10th to allocate up to $100,000 to fund a lawsuit challenging Governor Mike Dunleavy’s executive order to establish Department of Agriculture.

Rep. Chuck Kopp (R-Anchorage) and Rep. Mike Prax (R-North Pole) were the only members of the council to oppose the lawsuit, with Prax arguing that the legal basis for it is weak and advocating dialogue with the governor instead of pursuing litigation.

The controversy began on December 20, 2024, when Dunleavy announced executive order 136 to elevate the Division of Agriculture—currently within the Department of Natural Resources—into a cabinet-level agency to bolster Alaska’s food security. The order, would have moved current staff and budgets to the new agency starting July 1, 2025.

In March 2025, lawmakers voted 32-28 to reject the order, citing concerns over costs and a lack of legislative input.

Dunleavy reintroduced the order during an August 2025 special session, prompting objections from legislative leaders. In a letter dated August 29, 2025, Senate President Gary Stevens and House Speaker Bryce Edgmon argued that it was a violation of constitutional rules to resubmit a rejected order, especially in a special session focused on education funding.

The governor’s office has not directly addressed the letter, stating only on September 10, “The governor’s position remains unchanged.”

The council’s vote authorizes hiring legal counsel, with Stoel Rives, a firm with an Anchorage office, as the likely choice, pending contract approval. The lawsuit aims to clarify whether Dunleavy can implement the order by treating legislative inaction as approval.

Rep. Prax, one of the dissenters, opposed the lawsuit based on his interpretation of Alaska’s Constitution: A Citizen’s Guide, which he shared with council members in a memo. Citing Article III, Section 23, Prax emphasized the provision’s “plain language,” which states that the legislature has 60 days during a regular session or the entirety of a shorter special session to disapprove an executive order.

Prax contended that the lawsuit’s premise—that reintroducing a rejected executive order in a special session is unconstitutional—is on “shaky ground.” His argument is that the constitution addresses special sessions differently, permitting disapproval only within the 30-day duration and scope of that session.

The August special session focused on education, which leads Prax to believe that the governor’s reintroduction does not violate the constitution; it does not explicitly prohibit resubmission across different types of sessions. The guide shows that this rule, based on the federal Reorganization Act of 1932, generally benefits the governor by making it easier to reorganize without needing a complete legislative bill.

When reached for comment, Rep. Prax emphasized a collaborative approach, stating, “It would be much better if we worked this issue out by talking to the governor and not in a court suit.” He expressed concern that litigation escalates tensions unnecessarily when negotiations could resolve the dispute, aligning with his view that the constitutional ambiguity might not favor the legislature’s case.

Rep. Kopp, the other dissenter, argued that the administration appeared to have paused its push for the department outside legislative channels, suggesting the lawsuit could be premature.

Alaska, one of only two states without a dedicated agriculture department, has two stalled legislative bills to create one through standard processes.

Brenda Josephson is a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska. You can contact her via email at [email protected].

The University of Alaska Board of Regents Proposes Cutting Affirmative Action Language for Merit-Based Hiring

20

By BRENDA JOSEPHSON

The University of Alaska (UA) Board of Regents has proposed revisions to Regents’ Policy 04.02, which would eliminate affirmative action language to align with federal mandates and emphasize merit-based hiring. The board introduced these changes during its meeting in Juneau on September 5-6. The revisions aim to ensure fairness and compliance while securing access to essential federal funding.

The current Regents’ Policy 04.02 commits the university to equal employment opportunity and outlines an affirmative action program designed to recruit and promote “protected classes.” It mandates that major administrative units develop their own affirmative action programs and appoint affirmative action officers to oversee and monitor progress. 

The proposed amendments would eliminate these provisions and introduce a clear focus on “merit-based advancement opportunities” and “equal opportunities and access in employment to all individuals, free from any unlawful discrimination based on legally protected status.” The role of “affirmative action officer” would be changed to “human resources officer,” indicating a move toward more streamlined and impartial hiring practices.

This move is in response to a January 2025 executive order from President Donald Trump, which rescinded Executive Order 11246, a 1965 mandate that required federal contractors to implement affirmative action programs. By aligning with Trump’s federal directive, UA seeks to protect millions in federal grants that are essential to its operations.

In a news release, the university claims that the elimination of affirmative action language will not change its practices. The release states, “As a practical matter, if adopted by the board in November, the policy updates will not result in changes to UA’s current hiring or admission practices, which remain consistent with long-standing federal guidance barring discrimination.”

This development builds on other changes in 2025 that updated university practices. In February, the board voted to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) terminology from websites, publications, and job titles, a move that clarified UA’s commitment to fairness and compliance with federal expectations.

In June, further updates eliminated references to “affirmative action” in favor of language that emphasizes equal access and merit. These modifications, reviewed alongside updates to public records policies during the September meeting, demonstrate an effort to keep UA competitive and financially secure.

The proposed revisions, presented as a first reading, are scheduled for a final vote in November. University officials emphasize that these updates will safeguard UA against potential funding losses while strengthening a hiring process that prioritizes qualifications over quotas. This approach reflects a broader national trend toward policies that emphasize individual merit, ensuring fairness and opportunity.

For more details on the policy revisions and board activities, visit alaska.edu/bor.

Brenda Josephson is a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska. You can contact her via email at [email protected].

Palmer Gathers for Charlie Kirk Vigil at Church on the Rock

9

By BRENDA JOSEPHSON

Community members filled the Palmer Church on the Rock for a vigil honoring Charlie Kirk, the late founder of Turning Point USA and a notable conservative activist. The event, organized by the Republican Party and local pastors with considerable assistance from Rep. Cathy Tilton, emphasized Kirk’s significant impact on faith, truth, and civic engagement.

The vigil, which took place without music or food, filled the church’s sanctuary to capacity, leaving only standing room available. Overflow attendees gathered in the lobby and outside to pay their respects. The evening fostered a spirit of unity and introspection, as attendees prayed for strength, protection, and the ongoing faith revival that Kirk passionately advocated.

Palmer Church of the Rock Lobby during the vigil

Local pastors, Vic Fonov, Josh O’Donnell, Joelle Sanchez, and Patrick Napier delivered heartfelt remarks that emphasized Kirk’s dedication to sharing his faith and promoting conservative values.

Several legislators were present, including Reps. Rauscher, McCabe, Tilton, Underwood, and Johnson, along with Sen. Shower and Mat-Su assembly member Dimitri Fonov. Alaska Republican Party Chair Carmela Warfield addressed the crowd, sharing messages of hope and resilience.

Alaska governor candidate Adam Crum captured the significance of the event by stating, “The overwhelming support that showed up clearly demonstrates that Charlie Kirk’s impact cannot be overstated. Almost 1,000 people came together to pray for strength, protection, and the ongoing faith revival across our nation. In this way, we honor Charlie, who devoted his life to spreading the Gospel and truth.”

Josh Hanson, Vice Chair of ARP District 25, shared his thoughts: “It was good to see the community come together in the face of online criticism to honor Charlie Kirk, a person of deep faith and conviction, who made significant contributions to the conservative movement. I hope Charlie’s life inspires us as Christians and especially members of the Alaska Republican Party to boldly and courageously stand for the truth and our values.”

Senator Shelley Hughes, who was unable to attend due to her travels in Israel, sent her campaign coordinator to represent her at the vigil. In a statement shared on Facebook, Hughes expressed her condolences, stating, “My heart goes out to his dear wife and sweet children for this unjustified tragedy. I hope that, as his legacy, we can follow the path he modeled, emphasizing civil discourse and critical thinking skills, regardless of where individuals fall on the political spectrum.”

Pastor Josh O’Donnell offered words of consolation and encouragement, stating, “Evil didn’t win this week. While we grieve the heartbreaking loss of one of the most faithful, courageous, and brilliant Christians we’ve ever had the privilege to witness in this generation… Evil didn’t win. This hateful act may seem like a victory for darkness, but we already see it sparking a fire within countless others, inspiring them to rise up tenfold in his passion for Jesus and this nation.”

The vigil, largely organized through the dedicated efforts of Rep. Cathy Tilton, served as a poignant reminder of Kirk’s significant influence. Alaskans came together, filling every available space, to mourn his loss and commit to advancing his mission of promoting truth and unity.

Brenda Josephson is a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska. You can contact her via email at [email protected].

Greg Sarber: Charlie Kirk – American Martyr

9

By GREG SARBER

It has taken me a couple of days to gather my thoughts on the assassination of Charlie Kirk.  After giving it some consideration, I believe that the radical left will very much regret this man’s death.

In the immediate aftermath of his assassination, a few left-wing ghouls expressed joy that Mr. Kirk had died.  The leftist blogosphere had some insane commentary, some blaming Charlie for his own murder, some inexplicably blaming President Trump, saying that the president’s previous comments amounted to a threat that forced a violent left-wing response.  Only an individual possessed by evil can take joy in another man’s assassination, and by blaming conservatives for the acts of violence committed against them, the leftists are making twists of logic that only a Democrat could understand. 

However, Charlie Kirk’s death may become an inflection point in history that will not stop his message; it will work to make the ideas he supported more powerful than ever.  Two historical examples illustrate why.

The first example is from the book of Acts in the Bible.  Stephen, who is an Apostle of Jesus in the early church, is described as having wisdom and an ability to speak so compellingly that his opponents couldn’t win an argument against him.  Stephen sounds a lot like Charlie Kirk.  Stephen was considered a threat and was condemned to death by stoning.  Stephen is considered the very first Christian martyred for his faith.  As he was about to die, Stephen prayed for forgiveness for his executioners. 

One man present at his execution was Saul, who was a Pharisee and an avid persecutor of Christians. Soon after the execution, Saul left for Damascus, where he encountered Jesus on the road and underwent a profound transformation in his beliefs, changing his name from Saul to Paul. He became one of the most important members of the church and a man who spread Christianity throughout much of the known world.  We would not have a Christian church today were it not for Paul.  Who knows how witnessing Stephen’s execution affected him?  Perhaps Stephen’s death was God’s plan in action, and perhaps Charlie’s death is also part of God’s plan, in ways that we cannot comprehend right now.

There is also the example of Abraham Lincoln after the Civil War.  Before he was assassinated, Lincoln had proposed a generous and non-punitive plan to return the former Confederate states speedily to the United States.  His magnanimity demonstrates that when a celebration was held at the end of the war, Lincoln asked the band to play the southern anthem, Dixie, to honor the southern troops that had fought so gallantly. 

However, it was not to be.  Four days later, Southern sympathizer John Wilkes Booth assassinated Lincoln, and the path of Reconstruction changed radically.   The American public was outraged and angered at the South for this act of betrayal.  They demanded collective accountability for all southern states because of the act of one lone assassin.  The new president, Andrew Johnson, decided that the South should be punished for seceding from the Union and famously remarked that, “Treason is a crime and must be…made infamous, and traitors must be impoverished.”  He accomplished all of that and more.  The South was occupied by Union troops for over a decade and endured much more onerous terms than they would have received had Lincoln lived. 

Charlie Kirk’s death may inspire something similar to these two historical examples.  Some on the left may not want to be associated with radicals willing to kill their political opponents and may turn away from them like Saul did.  Or perhaps, like in Lincoln’s example, the resolve of the country may harden against the political left.  Maybe the public will demand justice and accountability, and reject any politician sympathetic to their radical leftist agenda.  It might become unfashionable to support the delusional woke ideas the left has been feeding us.

Kirk’s assassination may accomplish just the opposite of what his murderer intended.  Instead of stopping him, maybe his death will hasten the spread of Kirk’s ideas.  They would have been far better off by listening to what Charlie had to say instead of killing him.   

Greg Sarber is a lifelong Alaskan. He is a petroleum engineer who spent his career working on Alaska’s North Slope. Now retired, he lives with his family in Homer, Alaska. Greg serves as a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska.

Yukon Quest Alaska unveils 750-Mile all-Alaska Route for 2026 Dog Sled Race

4

The Yukon Quest will return to long-distance racing in 2026 with a new 750-mile route that will be entirely in Alaska’s rugged Interior. On September 11, Yukon Quest Alaska announced the details of the course. The traditional 1,000-mile international route from Fairbanks to Whitehorse, Yukon, last took place in 2020, marking the first long race since then. This announcement has sparked excitement among mushers, fans, and adventure enthusiasts for the event scheduled for February 2026.

In 2025, the Yukon Quest sled dog race featured two distinct, shorter races instead of the traditional 1,000-mile international course. On the Canadian side, the Yukon Quest 450 consisted of a 425-mile loop that began and ended in Teslin, Yukon. Several Checkpoints, including one as far north as Faro, were part of the route. Additionally, the Yukon Quest Alaska hosted a 250-mile race that ran from Fairbanks to Tok, Alaska. Full recaps and standings are available at www.yukonquest.com and www.yukonquestalaska.com.

The 2026 Yukon Quest will feature a circular trail that starts and ends in Fairbanks. This course will showcase Alaska’s stunning wilderness and its historic mushing communities. Spanning 750 miles, the route will include checkpoints that are spaced far apart, such as Nenana, Tanana, Rampart, Beaver, Fort Yukon, Circle, Central, and Two Rivers. Organizers designed the route to honor the legacy of sled dogs while also addressing contemporary challenges, such as warmer winters, which have made traditional paths less dependable due to ice conditions on rivers and lakes.

In addition to the main event, Yukon Quest Alaska will also host its 80-mile Fun Run. This race is designed for novices and aims to help participants develop new skills while promoting community involvement.

Details regarding checkpoints, required gear, and race rules are still being finalized, with updates expected soon. The organization has emphasized its commitment to ensuring the safety of mushers, their 14-dog teams, and volunteers.

Since 1984, the Yukon Quest has gained international popularity for testing the endurance and athleticism of both humans and dogs. The organization established this event to honor the Klondike Gold Rush and the crucial role sled dogs played. Unlike other races, the Quest requires mushers to be self-sufficient, as they must carry all their gear and food across vast, frozen terrains, often in frigid temperatures that can plummet to -50°F.

Mushers are preparing for what is expected to be a challenging race, with a prize pool that has historically exceeded $100,000 for the top finishers. Fans can follow the action through live GPS tracking, leaderboards, and updates on social media. Fairbanks will be the ideal location for spectators to watch in person, as it hosts both the start and finish lines.

If you want to stay up-to-date, you can find news on the Facebook page for Yukon Quest Alaska. More information will soon be available at www.yukonquestalaska.com.

Brenda Josephson is a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska. You can contact her via email at [email protected].