ADN - Craig Medred's views on the Pilgrim Access Case

Text from http://www.adn.com/outdoors/story/4460182p-4444602c.html see .PDF copy here MORE INFO: www.landrights.org/ak/wrst

Hales wear Pilgrim mask to take from, not give to, Alaska By Craig Medred, Anchorage Daily News, Sunday, November 30, 2003; Page G-1	ERROR CORRECTIONS AND THE REST OF THE STORY prepared by Alaska Land Rights Coalition and the People of McCarthy, Alaska - DRAFT #2
What this state really needs these days is a big, new land giveaway. This is the only conclusion to be drawn if one has been following the plight of the so-called "Pilgrim family'' in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park. The 17 members of the poor Pilgrim clan were forced to pool their Permanent Fund dividend checks to buy an old mining claim (1) on which to set up housekeeping in the park so they could gain the "right'' to put a fish wheel (2) in the Copper River to scoop up Alaska salmon and the "right'' to subsistence hunt for some of the biggest Dall sheep in North America. Why should newcomers to our state have to spend a year here to be able to collect PFD checks in order to buy their way into such an opportunity? Why don't we just give them free land, so they can get started right away? Why, if we added free land to the pot that already contains those PFD checks, subsistence and food stamps, we could probably attract every lowlife, wannabe Bushrat in the West. We could then twist the words of former President John F. Kennedy into a new motto for the 49th state: Ask not what you can do for Alaska; ask what Alaska can do for you. Am I irritated by the Pilgrims -- real name Hales -- and that crazy handful of Alaskans so preoccupied with land rights (3) that they would rush to defend a decision by these people to bulldoze a road through the park to their land? (4) Damn right. I've been irritated since I saw the first photographs of the Pilgrims', aka Hales', home adorned with fresh moose antlers -- subsistence moose antlers. (5) I know people who've spent their lives trying to make Alaska a better place, and they can't get subsistence hunting permits. But somehow the Hales qualify because, well, they're living out there in the park and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act says that's all it takes to qualify.	(1) They bought 410 acres of PATENTED mining claims legally no different then the land under many Fairbanks and Juneau subdivisions. (2) They don't and have never owned a fish wheel at Chitina or anywhere else. They have used the free community fish wheel in Chitina at times like untold many other McCarthy - Chitina - Copper Valley residents. Did you ever ask them why they bought the property? (3) This "crazy handful of Alaskans so preoccupied with land rights" is defending the promises to Alaska made in ANILCA including rights to access. This is not about the Pilgrims other then their situation is just one of many -- and a particularly egregious, clear cut case -- of blockade by the Park Service of legitimate access. Do you mean this "crazy handful" to include the 100 people that attended meetings in Glennallen and McCarthy to discuss ANILCA access problems with this agency? 11/15/03 ADN column by Paula Easley Does "crazy handful" include the dozens of Pilgrim neighbors and Alaskans that helped people you describe as "blood suckers" with the airlift of needed supplies? (4) The Pilgrims did not "bulldoze a road through the park to their land". You described below at (22) what you could live with and, in reality, that is what they did! See Kreig sworn declaration to the court (especially paragraphs 7-10 and photos 1 - 6). "Bulldozing a road" is carefully chosen inflammatory language implying that something new was created. This is false; they created no new roads or trails. They only used a bulldozer as a tracked vehicle over an old road surface, generally with its blade up except in a few limited areas. (5) Is there something wrong with displaying moose antlers on an Alaskan cabin?
And the stupid state subsistence law, which is in many ways worse than the federal law, says much the same. The only real difference between the two is that the state law also lets some rich folk who've been here for eons qualify for subsistence permits. I find that disgusting, but not as disgusting as giving permits to people like the Pilgrims, aka Hales, who have hardly put in any time here. Look, if they were out in the park working their fingers to the bone to produce minerals from the mining claims they bought (11), it might be different. But they're not. They bought a mining claim because it was an easy and relatively cheap way to gain an inholding (12) in the park. Being legitimate park inholders, they in turn gain access to the Wrangell-St. Elias Private Hunting Reserve (which is what Alaska's new parks really are) and a fish wheel on the Copper River. Did they do anything to earn any of this? No. Have they done anything to promote the better good of Alaska or of their fellow Alaskans since they got here from New Mexico? No. If anything, the evidence appears to indicate the opposite. The evidence appears to show that the Pilgrims, aka Hales, basically used every opportunity possible to take advantage of their fellow Alaskans. That's what they appear to have done in Fairbanks. That's what they appear to have done in Anchor Point.	(11) The National Park Service has made it impossible for the Pilgrims and every other mining land owner in the parks to do any mining on their land. See: ANILCA - J.P. Tangen, editor, D(2), part 2 : a report to the people of Alaska on the land promises in ANILCA : 20 years later. 2000, Alaska Miners Association, Anchorage, Alaska, 95 p. "Promise Broken — Guarantees and assurances for the protection of valid existing rights appear throughout ANILCA. However, some agencies, most notably the National Park Service, have repeatedly and consistently violated this promise where mining claims have been involved. The National Park Service has done everything possible to stop all mining activity within the boundaries of park units. This has been a calculated, deliberate and illegal effort to deprive the miners of rights that were promised by ANILCA." [p. 81] What were the Promises Made by ANILCA? The promises made in ANILCA can be grouped into three general categories. The first promise was for the protection of valid existing rights where lands containing such rights were being withdrawn and placed in CSUs. In other words, activities previously allowed would be allowed to continue. This included such things as sport and subsistence hunting and fishing, guiding operations and mining. This promise also meant that miners with existing claims could continue to develop and mine those claims and if they could meet all the necessary requirements, they could still patent those claims, just as before the passage of ANILCA. The second general promise was that access to private lands inside CSUs (inholdings) and across CSUs would be guaranteed. This was a major theme found throughout ANILCA. Access to Native Corporation lands; access to Native allotments; access to homesteads. [p. 8] (12) ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE - Their 410 acres cost $450,000! If they had bought a lot in McCarthy for $5,000 they would have qualified for the same subsistence rights. They didn't even have to buy land in the park! A $3,000 trailer lot in the Glennallen area would do just fine to qualify.
That's clearly what they've done in the park. Give us our PFD checks. Give us our subsistence. Now get out of our way and let us do as we please. And hey, I might even have been able to stomach that if the Hales had simply put a four-wheeler trailer up the old, eroding (21) mining road to their self-proclaimed homestead. If they hacked down a bunch of old alder and rolled some rock around to make the old road into a passable trail for a four-wheeler, I could live with that.(22) Yes, the Park Service might still have protested. The federal agency does, after all, have a history of being somewhat schizophrenic (23) about these things. On one hand, it's wanting to bust people for picking up eagle feathers, and on the other, it's devising ways to bus more tourists to scenic vistas. It appears at times to struggle mightily to find a sensible middle ground between preserving our national treasures and encouraging Americans to enjoy those national treasures. But what's going on out McCarthy way these days doesn't involve misguided or overzealous acts by the Park Service. (24) It involves the efforts of a handful of selfish people, aka Hales, to provoke a confrontation with the Park Service. The Pilgrims, aka Hales, didn't try to build the least intrusive road possible back to their property. Oh no. They went at the landscape with a bulldozer. (25) It was pretty clear what they were trying to do. They were trying to send the Park Service a message. And the message was: "up yours.'' This probably isn't surprising given that the gathering body of evidence would seem to indicate this is the general response of the Hales to anyone who doesn't see things their way. These Pilgrims, aka Hales, are on a mission. The mission is to create their own little world with their own little rules, which would be fine if they didn't want to support it all with our goodwill, our PFDs, our fish and our wildlife. The sad thing is that there are Alaskans who fail to see through the smokescreen, who rush to embrace these people supposedly victimized by the Park Service. (26) It's that old thinking that the enemy of your enemy is your friend. Sometimes that's true. This time it isn't. In this case, the enemy of your enemy is nothing but a worse enemy. The Pilgrims, aka Hales, don't want to contribute to Alaska. They want to take from it. These are not people who've put years of sweat into making Alaska a better place. These are not people who wish to build a better state for future Alaskans. These are not people who seek to do good works for their fellow Alaskans. (27) These are simply bloodsuckers on the body politic. (28) Lookie, lookie. It's Halloween and the Hales have put on their Pilgrim masks to come collect their PFD checks, their salmon, their moose, their sheep and anything else they can grab. I'm frankly embarrassed that any of my fellow Alaskans would have anything to do with these people. Daily News Outdoor editor Craig Medred can be reached at cmedred@adn.com. ----------------------- [Photo] - MARC LESTER / Anchorage Daily News - Papa Pilgrim, 62, says God directed him to lead his family to live at a remote homestead in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park. -----------------------	(21) The 14 mile road has no sections where "erosion" is significant enough to pose a problem for four wheel drive trafficability except possibly at a few stream banks. Nearly all of the road is flat. (22) Actually, you have described what they did very well here. CAN YOU LIVE WITH THAT? Again see Kreig sworn declaration to the court (especially paragraphs 7-10 and photos 1 - 6). (23) It's good you recognize this fact. For more details see: SHORT COURSE: 80 YEAR HISTORY OF NPS ABUSE AND MISCONDUCT - ALASKA VERSION ANILCA says VALID EXISTING RIGHTS SEC. 1109. Nothing in this title shall be construed to adversely affect any valid existing right of access. SPECIAL ACCESS AND ACCESS TO INHOLDINGS SEC. 1110 (b) ...in any case in which... privately owned land... is within... one or more conservation system units... the... private owner... SHALL be given... such rights as may be necessary to assure adequate and feasible access for economic and other purposes to the concerned land by such... private owner. How exactly does the Park Service disregard this mandate from Congress? You have a new way to describe it: schizophrenic. See PILGRIM SHORT BRIEFING for more details, the difference between "reasonable" regulation and "fanatical" and "extremist" regulation. (24) Is spending over $250,000 to trump up charges against the Pilgrims for supposed terrain damage from taking a tracked vehicle (bulldozer generally with blade up) over a 100 year old mining road "misguided or overzealous"? "Park officials say they have spent more than $250,000 investigating damage and preparing a civil case against the Pilgrims...[ADN - Tom Kizzia - 10/12/03] This while they complain "We're always in a deficit mode," said Marcia Blaszak, [Park Service] acting regional director in Alaska. [ADN 11/26/03] The Park Service closed its newly constructed McCarthy visitor center because it claimed it couldn't find $20,000 to staff it! Is it "misguided or overzealous" for Park Superintendent Gary Candelaria to prepare an official letter that is shown by Park Service employees to visitors (but no copies allowed) that says: "the Pilgrims do not yet own the land they are living upon. In fact, they have not made a payment to the holder of their deed of trust since last year and are in danger of being foreclosed. They have refused to pay their creditor since January, and have also refused to leave his land." THIS STATEMENT IS AND WAS FALSE. Is it "misguided or overzealous" for Candelaria to further write, "The Pilgrims have broken the law, openly, deliberately, repeatedly." This compelled the publisher of the local Wrangell-St. Elias News and pastor of the McCarthy Community Church to observe, "the Pilgrims have not been charged with any crime, there has been no trial, nor have they been found guilty by a jury or judge." [WRST Superintendent defames Inholders in "Open Letter", WSEN July & August 2003 p.15-16.] (25) They didn't need to build any road. It was already there. THEY DID NOT "GO AT THE LANDSCAPE WITH A BULLDOZER". (26) For the first time in history, the Park Service closed the road to the Pilgrim's property. Immediately thereafter, why did McCarthy townspeople pack a 4/18/03 meeting and become irate after hearing the Superintendent fail at justifying what he did? Is this likely to have happened if only the Pilgrims were "supposedly victimized"? Is there someone who knows more about what really went on out there, someone who can evaluate the reality of the Pilgrims credibility and plight, then the McCarthy neighbors who attended that meeting? (27) What are the criteria for judging Alaskans doing "good works"? Should the following be considered? * During all the chaos and turmoil the family has endured from the Park Service blockade, the Pilgrims REBUILT the McCarthy church generator shed the day after it burnt down (and the Pilgrims came to the rescue when the fire broke out, saving further church property damage. They do not even attend that particular church.) * The Pilgrim's older boys worked hard rebuilding a local's cabin for the winter (acting only as a good neighbor, without remuneration). The person they helped had a baby recently. * The Pilgrims have performed as midwife to more than one child in McCarthy (other than their own newborn child). We are a very long way from any birthing assistance so this knowledge is quite important to have in the community. * Pilgrims helped in the recent town battery cleanup serving on a volunteer crew with the Park Service, AkDOT and others (9/03 Wrangell-St. Elias News p. 27, "Getting the lead out...and more") * One of the volunteer airlift pilots came to the aid of the Pilgrims because they had brought him food when they heard he broke his leg and they didn't even know him. (28) IS "BLOODSUCKERS" A GOOD NAME FOR THE FOREGOING?

Hales wear Pilgrim mask to take from, not give to, Alaska
By Craig Medred, Anchorage Daily News, Sunday, November 30, 2003; Page G-1

ERROR CORRECTIONS AND THE REST OF THE STORY prepared by Alaska Land Rights Coalition and the People of McCarthy, Alaska - DRAFT #2

What this state really needs these days is a big, new land giveaway.

This is the only conclusion to be drawn if one has been following the plight of the so-called "Pilgrim family'' in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park.

The 17 members of the poor Pilgrim clan were forced to pool their Permanent Fund dividend checks to buy an old mining claim (1) on which to set up housekeeping in the park so they could gain the "right'' to put a fish wheel (2) in the Copper River to scoop up Alaska salmon and the "right'' to subsistence hunt for some of the biggest Dall sheep in North America.

Why should newcomers to our state have to spend a year here to be able to collect PFD checks in order to buy their way into such an opportunity?

Why don't we just give them free land, so they can get started right away?

Why, if we added free land to the pot that already contains those PFD checks, subsistence and food stamps, we could probably attract every lowlife, wannabe Bushrat in the West.

We could then twist the words of former President John F. Kennedy into a new motto for the 49th state:

Ask not what you can do for Alaska; ask what Alaska can do for you.

Am I irritated by the Pilgrims -- real name Hales -- and that crazy handful of Alaskans so preoccupied with land rights (3) that they would rush to defend a decision by these people to bulldoze a road through the park to their land? (4)

Damn right.

I've been irritated since I saw the first photographs of the Pilgrims', aka Hales', home adorned with fresh moose antlers -- subsistence moose antlers. (5)

I know people who've spent their lives trying to make Alaska a better place, and they can't get subsistence hunting permits. But somehow the Hales qualify because, well, they're living out there in the park and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act says that's all it takes to qualify.

(1) They bought 410 acres of PATENTED mining claims legally no different then the land under many Fairbanks and Juneau subdivisions.

(2) They don't and have never owned a fish wheel at Chitina or anywhere else. They have used the free community fish wheel in Chitina at times like untold many other McCarthy - Chitina - Copper Valley residents.

Did you ever ask them why they bought the property?

(3) This "crazy handful of Alaskans so preoccupied with land rights" is defending the promises to Alaska made in ANILCA including rights to access. This is not about the Pilgrims other then their situation is just one of many -- and a particularly egregious, clear cut case -- of blockade by the Park Service of legitimate access. Do you mean this "crazy handful" to include the 100 people that attended meetings in Glennallen and McCarthy to discuss ANILCA access problems with this agency? 11/15/03 ADN column by Paula Easley Does "crazy handful" include the dozens of Pilgrim neighbors and Alaskans that helped people you describe as "blood suckers" with the airlift of needed supplies?

(4) The Pilgrims did not "bulldoze a road through the park to their land". You described below at (22) what you could live with and, in reality, that is what they did! See Kreig sworn declaration to the court (especially paragraphs 7-10 and photos 1 - 6). "Bulldozing a road" is carefully chosen inflammatory language implying that something new was created. This is false; they created no new roads or trails. They only used a bulldozer as a tracked vehicle over an old road surface, generally with its blade up except in a few limited areas.

(5) Is there something wrong with displaying moose antlers on an Alaskan cabin?

And the stupid state subsistence law, which is in many ways worse than the federal law, says much the same. The only real difference between the two is that the state law also lets some rich folk who've been here for eons qualify for subsistence permits. I find that disgusting, but not as disgusting as giving permits to people like the Pilgrims, aka Hales, who have hardly put in any time here.

Look, if they were out in the park working their fingers to the bone to produce minerals from the mining claims they bought (11), it might be different. But they're not.

They bought a mining claim because it was an easy and relatively cheap way to gain an inholding (12) in the park. Being legitimate park inholders, they in turn gain access to the Wrangell-St. Elias Private Hunting Reserve (which is what Alaska's new parks really are) and a fish wheel on the Copper River.

Did they do anything to earn any of this?

No.

Have they done anything to promote the better good of Alaska or of their fellow Alaskans since they got here from New Mexico?

No.

If anything, the evidence appears to indicate the opposite. The evidence appears to show that the Pilgrims, aka Hales, basically used every opportunity possible to take advantage of their fellow Alaskans. That's what they appear to have done in Fairbanks. That's what they appear to have done in Anchor Point.

(11) The National Park Service has made it impossible for the Pilgrims and every other mining land owner in the parks to do any mining on their land. See: ANILCA - J.P. Tangen, editor, D(2), part 2 : a report to the people of Alaska on the land promises in ANILCA : 20 years later. 2000, Alaska Miners Association, Anchorage, Alaska, 95 p. "Promise Broken — Guarantees and assurances for the protection of valid existing rights appear throughout ANILCA. However, some agencies, most notably the National Park Service, have repeatedly and consistently violated this promise where mining claims have been involved. The National Park Service has done everything possible to stop all mining activity within the boundaries of park units. This has been a calculated, deliberate and illegal effort to deprive the miners of rights that were promised by ANILCA." [p. 81] What were the Promises Made by ANILCA? The promises made in ANILCA can be grouped into three general categories. The first promise was for the protection of valid existing rights where lands containing such rights were being withdrawn and placed in CSUs. In other words, activities previously allowed would be allowed to continue. This included such things as sport and subsistence hunting and fishing, guiding operations and mining. This promise also meant that miners with existing claims could continue to develop and mine those claims and if they could meet all the necessary requirements, they could still patent those claims, just as before the passage of ANILCA. The second general promise was that access to private lands inside CSUs (inholdings) and across CSUs would be guaranteed. This was a major theme found throughout ANILCA. Access to Native Corporation lands; access to Native allotments; access to homesteads. [p. 8]

(12) ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE - Their 410 acres cost $450,000! If they had bought a lot in McCarthy for $5,000 they would have qualified for the same subsistence rights. They didn't even have to buy land in the park! A $3,000 trailer lot in the Glennallen area would do just fine to qualify.

That's clearly what they've done in the park.

Give us our PFD checks. Give us our subsistence.

Now get out of our way and let us do as we please.

And hey, I might even have been able to stomach that if the Hales had simply put a four-wheeler trailer up the old, eroding (21) mining road to their self-proclaimed homestead.

If they hacked down a bunch of old alder and rolled some rock around to make the old road into a passable trail for a four-wheeler, I could live with that.(22)

Yes, the Park Service might still have protested. The federal agency does, after all, have a history of being somewhat schizophrenic (23) about these things.

On one hand, it's wanting to bust people for picking up eagle feathers, and on the other, it's devising ways to bus more tourists to scenic vistas. It appears at times to struggle mightily to find a sensible middle ground between preserving our national treasures and encouraging Americans to enjoy those national treasures.

But what's going on out McCarthy way these days doesn't involve misguided or overzealous acts by the Park Service. (24) It involves the efforts of a handful of selfish people, aka Hales, to provoke a confrontation with the Park Service.

The Pilgrims, aka Hales, didn't try to build the least intrusive road possible back to their property. Oh no. They went at the landscape with a bulldozer. (25)

It was pretty clear what they were trying to do. They were trying to send the Park Service a message. And the message was: "up yours.''

This probably isn't surprising given that the gathering body of evidence would seem to indicate this is the general response of the Hales to anyone who doesn't see things their way.

These Pilgrims, aka Hales, are on a mission. The mission is to create their own little world with their own little rules, which would be fine if they didn't want to support it all with our goodwill, our PFDs, our fish and our wildlife.

The sad thing is that there are Alaskans who fail to see through the smokescreen, who rush to embrace these people supposedly victimized by the Park Service. (26) It's that old thinking that the enemy of your enemy is your friend.

Sometimes that's true. This time it isn't.

In this case, the enemy of your enemy is nothing but a worse enemy. The Pilgrims, aka Hales, don't want to contribute to Alaska. They want to take from it.

These are not people who've put years of sweat into making Alaska a better place.

These are not people who wish to build a better state for future Alaskans.

These are not people who seek to do good works for their fellow Alaskans. (27)

These are simply bloodsuckers on the body politic. (28)

Lookie, lookie. It's Halloween and the Hales have put on their Pilgrim masks to come collect their PFD checks, their salmon, their moose, their sheep and anything else they can grab.

I'm frankly embarrassed that any of my fellow Alaskans would have anything to do with these people.

Daily News Outdoor editor Craig Medred can be reached at cmedred@adn.com.

-----------------------
[Photo] - MARC LESTER / Anchorage Daily News - Papa Pilgrim, 62, says God directed him to lead his family to live at a remote homestead in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park. -----------------------

(21) The 14 mile road has no sections where "erosion" is significant enough to pose a problem for four wheel drive trafficability except possibly at a few stream banks. Nearly all of the road is flat.

(22) Actually, you have described what they did very well here. CAN YOU LIVE WITH THAT? Again see Kreig sworn declaration to the court (especially paragraphs 7-10 and photos 1 - 6).

(23) It's good you recognize this fact. For more details see: SHORT COURSE: 80 YEAR HISTORY OF NPS ABUSE AND MISCONDUCT - ALASKA VERSION

ANILCA says

VALID EXISTING RIGHTS
SEC. 1109. Nothing in this title shall be construed to adversely affect any valid existing right of access.

SPECIAL ACCESS AND ACCESS TO INHOLDINGS
SEC. 1110 (b) ...in any case in which... privately owned land... is within... one or more conservation system units... the... private owner... SHALL be given... such rights as may be necessary to assure adequate and feasible access for economic and other purposes to the concerned land by such... private owner.

How exactly does the Park Service disregard this mandate from Congress? You have a new way to describe it: schizophrenic. See PILGRIM SHORT BRIEFING for more details, the difference between "reasonable" regulation and "fanatical" and "extremist" regulation.

(24) Is spending over $250,000 to trump up charges against the Pilgrims for supposed terrain damage from taking a tracked vehicle (bulldozer generally with blade up) over a 100 year old mining road "misguided or overzealous"? "Park officials say they have spent more than $250,000 investigating damage and preparing a civil case against the Pilgrims...[ADN - Tom Kizzia - 10/12/03] This while they complain "We're always in a deficit mode," said Marcia Blaszak, [Park Service] acting regional director in Alaska. [ADN 11/26/03] The Park Service closed its newly constructed McCarthy visitor center because it claimed it couldn't find $20,000 to staff it!

Is it "misguided or overzealous" for Park Superintendent Gary Candelaria to prepare an official letter that is shown by Park Service employees to visitors (but no copies allowed) that says: "the Pilgrims do not yet own the land they are living upon. In fact, they have not made a payment to the holder of their deed of trust since last year and are in danger of being foreclosed. They have refused to pay their creditor since January, and have also refused to leave his land." THIS STATEMENT IS AND WAS FALSE. Is it "misguided or overzealous" for Candelaria to further write, "The Pilgrims have broken the law, openly, deliberately, repeatedly." This compelled the publisher of the local Wrangell-St. Elias News and pastor of the McCarthy Community Church to observe, "the Pilgrims have not been charged with any crime, there has been no trial, nor have they been found guilty by a jury or judge." [WRST Superintendent defames Inholders in "Open Letter", WSEN July & August 2003 p.15-16.]

(25) They didn't need to build any road. It was already there. THEY DID NOT "GO AT THE LANDSCAPE WITH A BULLDOZER".

(26) For the first time in history, the Park Service closed the road to the Pilgrim's property. Immediately thereafter, why did McCarthy townspeople pack a 4/18/03 meeting and become irate after hearing the Superintendent fail at justifying what he did? Is this likely to have happened if only the Pilgrims were "supposedly victimized"? Is there someone who knows more about what really went on out there, someone who can evaluate the reality of the Pilgrims credibility and plight, then the McCarthy neighbors who attended that meeting?

(27) What are the criteria for judging Alaskans doing "good works"? Should the following be considered?

* During all the chaos and turmoil the family has endured from the Park Service blockade, the Pilgrims REBUILT the McCarthy church generator shed the day after it burnt down (and the Pilgrims came to the rescue when the fire broke out, saving further church property damage. They do not even attend that particular church.)

* The Pilgrim's older boys worked hard rebuilding a local's cabin for the winter (acting only as a good neighbor, without remuneration). The person they helped had a baby recently.

* The Pilgrims have performed as midwife to more than one child in McCarthy (other than their own newborn child). We are a very long way from any birthing assistance so this knowledge is quite important to have in the community.

* Pilgrims helped in the recent town battery cleanup serving on a volunteer crew with the Park Service, AkDOT and others (9/03 Wrangell-St. Elias News p. 27, "Getting the lead out...and more")

* One of the volunteer airlift pilots came to the aid of the Pilgrims because they had brought him food when they heard he broke his leg and they didn't even know him.

(28) IS "BLOODSUCKERS" A GOOD NAME FOR THE FOREGOING?