"You have to risk it to get the biscuit." Sharman Haley On Hiking The Haute Route Through The Pyrenees [UPDATED 2/20/23]

[UPDATE 2/20/23 - Now available in Anchorage at  Mosquito books and Barnes and Noble]

Sharman Haley's book, Perspectives on Place: An Alaskan Explores the Pyrenees came out early December.  It's an account of her walking tour on the the Haute Route, some 800 kilometers (500 miles) through the Pyrenees of Northern Spain. Sharman is a retired economist and sometimes that's reflected in the depth she explores things.  But the beautiful water colors of her partner and travel companion Michael Samoya offer a refreshing respite from the more difficult passages.  A good reflection of the hike itself I would imagine.  

Sharman is a friend and was a colleague at the University of Alaska Anchorage.  She let me view a prepublication copy in November and I've left a draft of this post languish since early December.  My hope here is to give a sense of the book by using quotes that reflect the variety of topics she experienced on the trek.  Not unlike many posts on this blog.  

This book is probably most useful and interesting taken along when doing this hike through the Pyrenees.  It's most basic organization is chronological, so hiking along the trail, one gets history, geography, natural history, along with descriptions of the trail and refuges along the way.  So Sharman's details of the history of various locations would add richness to one's hike.  

There's often a tendency to compare what you're seeing to what you know.  It's how we expand our world view and gives us insights into our own homeland and assumptions. Sharman does this explicitly by adding an Alaska perspective to each chapter.   For example, one chapter describes wars and treaties going back to the 1300s in Aragon.  The matching Alaska history only goes back as far as the Russian invasion in the 1700s.  While Haley acknowledges that Alaska Natives have been on the land for tens of thousands of years, she excuses leaving  out any of that older history on the grounds that Native cultures were oral, so we don't know.  However, there are archeological digs in Alaska that go back further than the Russians and matching them to archeological sites on the route might have been a better connection - perhaps comparing the archeology experiences of both places.  Using invasions as the common thread seemed a stretch.  

Here's a sampling of what you'll find on the pages of this unique book and, for me, engaging trip through the Pyrenees.  

Useful travel advıce:

"Sleeping at the refuge with 30 other people side by side in two long

bunks was an experience. It was surprisingly comfortable and went remarkably

smoothly. Everyone was organized and quiet and respectful going to

bed and getting up. We were comfortable, yet didn’t sleep soundly.

The showers were great and the water was really, scaldingly hot! I

washed my hair. There was no gender separation in the bathrooms but of

course doors on the stalls. Our two showers, two red wines, veggie dinner,

two beds and breakfast cost 96€. The refuge administrator was a very

friendly, funny, multilingual middle-aged woman. In the winter she teaches

informatics. The guests are totally international from all over Europe. We

met no other Americans. Everyone uses English as their travel language." (98)

 

There's mountaineering history:

"Interest in mountaineering surged in the late 19th century. The

climbing and camping equipment was primitive by today’s standards:

Hemp ropes and iron crampons were heavy, and canvas tents were out of

the question. In the Pyrenees, early rock and ice climbers targeted the north faces of the peaks surrounding the Cirque de Gavarnie, mostly a day trip out of town. As their ambitions extended further, the need for overnight mountain lodging grew. Caves and shepherds’ huts were their earliest forms of shelter on multi-day climbs.

The first mountaineering club was formed in Gavarnie in 1864, named

the Société Ramond in honor of the illustrious Pyrenean naturalist Louis

Ramond de Carbonnières. The French Alpine Club (FAC) was founded in 1874 with the aim "to encourage and favor the knowledge of the mountain and its individual or collective frequentation in all seasons," including in its mission "the construction, improvement and maintenance of shelters, chalets, shelters and trails." The !rst mountain club in Spain, the Centre Excursionista de Catalunya (CEC), soon followed in 1876. These organizations, along with individual benefactors, launched the network of mountain refuges we enjoy today." (99-100)

Along with Michael's water colors.

 

Details on wildlife:

"My favorite insect of the whole trip was the burnet moth (Zygaena anthyllidis).  While burnets are common throughout Europe, this particular species of burnet is unique to the higher elevations of the Pyrenees. The burnet is the most brilliantly colored moth I’ve ever seen: iridescent black, with big, red spots on the wings. Most moths are dull brown and only around at night to evade predators. The burnet doesn’t have to worry about that. The red spots tell potential predators that it is poisonous. The burnet carries hydrogen cyanide, both for protection and—get this—for mating. Sounds a little kinky, doesn’t it?" (p. 61)

We also learn about honey bees after Mike gets stung.  After Sharman relates the physiology of the sting and the  response in the body, we learn about the bees of the Pyrenees, and the history of domesticated honeybees in the region..

“Honey has been produced and consumed in France and Spain for

millennia. Cave paintings near Valencia, Spain, more than 8,000 years old depict men collecting honey. The Bible and the Koran praise the virtues of honey as a food of nutritional value. Spain is number one in the EU in the number of hives and sixth in honey production. Spain also produces more than half of the beeswax in Europe. I don’t know how many honey producers there are in the Pyrenees specically, but there are 27 in the Ariège region alone. You can find a lot of them online who advertise in glowing terms the high quality, "flavor and ecological properties of their mountain product and sell direct to the consumer.” (118)

Here's one of Mike's paintings showing the beehives along the path.  

I learned a few words:

"Compounding the economic squeeze, the emigration of rural labor to industrial centers resulted in a shortage of shepherds to conduct the seasonal transhumance* of sheep." (126)

*"Transhumance:  noun

the seasonal migration of livestock, and the people who tend them, between lowlands and adjacent mountains." (from dictionary.com)

You can also tell that Haley was an economic policy analyst in a past life:

"More than two-thirds of the territory of Pallars Sobirà is under some

level of environmental protection. It also hosts seven ski resorts. In five

decades, the number of second homes in the region has mushroomed a

hundred-fold, from fewer than 25 to more than 2,500. While this boom in

the tourism economy has provided jobs, increased wages and helped to keep

some youth in the region, it has also increased property values and housing

costs for local residents. While the infrastructure has greatly improved,

temporary visitors and part-time residents do not enhance the social vitality

of the local communities. The transition also marks a decline in local

control, as more and more of the land use policies are defined by higher

levels of government and more and more of the businesses are owned by

nonlocal corporations."  p. 127

Interview with Jan, a German hang glider about why he was on the trail, people he'd met, and a link to this video :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8Zp25E_lbM  - his version of this trail. (Worth watching.)  He related some lessons he learned on the hike to Sharman:

"First: Don't keep your food inside the tent! You could wake up in

the middle of the night with a hungry fox next to your sleeping bag.

Second: You can easily compensate for your lack of fitness with

good navigation skills.

Third: There is no excuse! Even an Acute Respiratory Distress

Syndrome* should not hold you back from experiencing great adventures.

You have to risk it to get the biscuit.

And fourth: François Lelord is a wise man." (147-8)

*Earlier he had recounted a hiker he'd met who slept with an oxygen device at night.   

The next quote contains an extraordinary account of surviving in the cold.  I guess it's not the only instance of something like that happening.  It's also a reminder that despite the different environments, people who lived 1000 years ago were not that much different than we are.   

"The town L'Hospitalet-près-l’Andorre was named for the hospital (travelers’ hostel) that was established there in the first decade of the 11th century. The hospital was founded by the knight Bertrand d’Enveight in fulfillment of his vow to do so if he survived a snowstorm that caught him on the westside of Col de Puymorens, south of the Haute Route, where Route Nationale 20 (N20) crosses today. He saved himself by slitting open the belly of his horse, removing the entrails and climbing inside till the storm passed. He fulfilled his vow and dedicated the hospital to Saint Suzanne,  patron saint of his aunt, Suzanne d'Enveight, dowager of Cerdanya, in whose domain he was traveling." (159)

Some of the history can get a bit tedious, but then there is another disaster story that would fit in any modern tabloid or social media.

"The hospital was damaged or destroyed by avalanches several times over the years and rebuilt. In one case, year unknown, Moles wrote:This time the incident had a more tragic outcome than the previous one, entombing 5 women and 3 children, amongst them the wife and children of the Landlord who being away in Benasque survived but returned to the shocking news that he was now a widower and childless."  (162)

 

We learn about the cork forests they walk through and how they fights climate change.

"Not only is cork production sustainable, but a harvested cork oak tree stores up to five times more carbon than an unharvested tree, since the tree

utilizes additional carbon in the regeneration of its bark. Each year, cork oak

forests account for 9 million metric tonnes (10 million tons) of CO2

absorption. Cork stoppers for wine bottles have a much lower carbon footprint

than wine stoppers made from aluminum or plastic. And the byproducts

are made into bulletin boards and floor tiles."  (186 -7)

The Author Gets To Win Arguments 

"May 25-26

The morning was overcast, giving way to partly sunny and windy in

the afternoon when we set out for our next waypoint, Montalba

d’Am.lie. Mike was a little impatient with how slow I was going

uphill, and needing to stop to eat, so he said, “Give me more weight. The

less you carry, the better off I am.” So he carried almost all the food, as well

as all the camping gear. I carried the potato chips and toast. Lightest pack

ever! 

...On top of that, Mike’s knee became painful—probably from too heavy

a pack on too steep and rough a trail down after too many weeks without

hiking. [They did the whole trail in two parts.]  So the last hour coming down the road I took all the food. He tried to say it wasn’t making any di#erence in how his knee felt, but I said, “The less weight you carry, the better off I am.” The easy grade and firm surface made road walking easier on his knee than the trail had been, but it was easier for me too, and I was faster than he, even with the added weight, which, frankly, felt good. (196-8)

And a little more history

A second medieval monastery in the eastern Pyrenees, the abbey of Saint-Martin-du-Canigou, perches on a high cliff on the west flank of the Pic du Canigou. The primary access is by foot, 1,600 meters (1 mi) on narrow, steep path through the woods, above the town of Casteil. The original Benedictine monastery was endowed by Guifred, Count of Cerdagne, and consecrated in 1009. The Romanesque-style church was built on two levels: the lower, older crypt dedicated to the Virgin Mary, and the upper

church, completed in 1020, dedicated to St. Martin. The cloister was also

built on two levels, due to the steepness of the terrain.

The monastery has had a traumatic history. It was damaged in the

Catalan earthquake of 1428. It was secularized in 1782 by Louis XVI, abandoned by the monks and fell into disrepair. During the French Revolution,

the abbey was closed and its contents, including the sculptures and furniture,

were looted. Even the marble capitals from the pillars in the upper

cloister were removed and scattered through the neighboring villages. The ruins of the monastery lay empty for the entire 19th century. (192)

 

Some topics are hard to convey in words.  The birdsong descriptions probably mean little to those who haven’t already heard them or are very musical.

"The song of the tiny ruby-crowned kinglet is similarly loud and

complex. It typically has three parts: a series of high-pitched notes (zee-zeezee or tee-tee-tee), two to have low trills (turr or tu) and a repeated three note "galloping" phrase (tee-da-leet, tee-da-leet). Individual males sing their own variations, and females sing a shorter version of the song. The population of ruby-crowned kinglets is on the rise in less-disturbed habitats in northern latitudes".(p. 201)

While there are times Haley gets a little poetic, others are pretty dry recitation of facts: 

"In 1659, at the conclusion of the Thirty Years’ War, The Treaty of the

Pyrenees moved the border between the French and the Spanish monarchies

100 kilometers (62 mi) to the south where it is today, dividing French

and Spanish Catalonia. Roussillon became o#cially and permanently

French, but many inhabitants were still Spanish at heart. The medieval

fortress guarding the new border was handed over to France. In 1674,

during the Franco-Dutch War, the Spanish army occupied Bellegarde, but

the fortress was retaken by the French the following year.(p. 206)"

I'm sure sitting on the grass where this all took place after six hours of hiking makes this an interesting break.  

As I mentioned, this post has been sitting here as a draft for six weeks.  Today I added the pictures and cleaned up fonts and quotations.  So I'm going to just end abruptly here.  I enjoyed vicariously traveling with Sharman and Mike. For people not taking this hike, the book can give you a sense of what such an adventure is like.  And Mike's water colors are a delight and there's at least one in each chapter.  And I haven't really touched the sections on Alaska.  

Paperback Premium Color Print  (ISBN: 979-8-218-09640-3):              $35.95   $26.54   

Kindle e-book:   $9.99

Available at Alibris.  Publication date: December 1, 2022.

 

 

 

 

To The Folks Who Don't Come Here For Redistricting News

 Let me say I appreciate you all and I'm sorry for my obsession with redistricting.  This may or may not be over soon.  

Here's a post for you.  About other things I've been doing.  

I stopped at Loussac Library after dropping off my taxes at the post office and checked out the new book section.  

Between the Lines  is a bunch of short encounters with people who recommend a favorite book.  Lots of them.  This is probably a good book from which to get ideas for books to read.  

I was going to share the table of contents here, but I think it's too small to read so here are some of the sections:

• Arrivals
• 
  Trees
• Matriarchs
• Legacy Food
• Power
• Reality
• Big Brother
• Character
• Image
• Fabric
• Old New York
• Movement
• Access
• Space
• Time
• History
• Music
• Design
• (True) Colors
• Questions
• Migration
• Love
• Compassion
• Home
• Memories
• Waves
• The End of the Line 

Here's one from the food section.  Jody Scaravella.  It starts out, 

"I own a restaurant on Staten Island where different grandmothers cook every night."  

Imagine!  From all different cultural backgrounds.  I want to go to that restaurant.  

I couldn't get a sense of this book at a glance.  It's recommended by the guy who told us we were at the end of history.   And the use of the word aristocracy raises questions.  Is that good or bad in the author's mind.  There is a lot to be said for the meritocracy, where tests, not family connections, qualify you for college and jobs.  Where the smartest people rise to the top.  But smarts in certain areas don't mean a person is smart in other key areas and when people rise to the top, there are other problems.  Often they use their own rags to riches based on talent story to fault others who haven't made the same rise.  

I haven't read the book, but the reviews online seem to be from places like the Wall Street Journal and other business, right-wing outlets.  

Try this one, for example, from Minding The Campus/Reforming Our Universities:

"From Greta Thunberg to Black Lives Matter, activists are fond of pointing out society’s imperfections, but are completely clueless when it comes to proposing alternatives. Meritocracy—and related concepts, such as IQ—is a case in point. When Michael Young coined the term in his famous 1958 book The Rise of Meritocracy, many people shunned the idea that privileges should be allotted on the basis of merits. And sure enough, “meritocracy” is a word that is all too frequently tossed around to justify the status quo, which is admittedly far from ideal.

But what is the alternative? Activists have not considered enough what a world without meritocracy would look like. Adrian Wooldridge’s The Aristocracy of Talent is a powerful reminder that while meritocracy may have its shortcomings, the lack of meritocracy is far worse. Wooldridge looks at the historical record of past civilizations and draws a definite conclusion: without meritocracy, injustice runs rampant, and life is miserable for most people. Furthermore, as he sees it, “meritocracy is a golden ticket to prosperity,” even more so than democracy."

There's a definite sense here of dictatorship of the talented.  First he dumps on Greta Thunberg and Black Lives Matter, and then he thinks China is a good example.  

"Last month, Brian Buma, PhD, associate professor of integrative biology, released his first book, The Atlas of a Changing Climate (Timber Press, $35). The 280-page book is filled with more than 100 maps, charts, and infographics to help readers without a science background envision the shifting reality of our imperiled ecosystems. Buma, who is a National Geographic Explorer, covers climate change, shrinking wildlife habitats, rising sea levels, and vanishing species."

The quote is from an interview with the author in CUDenver News. 

I suspect this and the previous book reflect less the Bronson attempted takeover of the Anchorage library system, than the fact that the library has always had a collection of conservative as well as other political viewpoints at the library.  

“Then Mordecai told them to reply to Esther, ‘Do not imagine that you in the king’s palace can escape any more than all the Jews. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place and you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?’” Esther 4:13-14 (NASB)  From Proverbs31 Ministries.

I'm afraid I saw more than enough her when she defended the disgraced Donald Trump.  But put this under your "know thine enemy" reading list.  

"Throughout America, structural problems are getting worse. Economic inequality is near Gilded Age heights, the healthcare system is a mess, and the climate crisis continues to grow. Yet most ambitious policy proposals that might fix these calamities are dismissed as wastefully expensive by default. From the kitchen table to Congress, debates are punctuated with a familiar refrain: "How are you going to pay for that?"

This question is designed to shut down policy pushes up front, minimizing any interference with the free market. It comes from neoliberalism, an economic ideology that has overtaken both parties. Proponents insist that markets are naturally-occurring and apolitical—and that too much manipulation of the economy will make our society fall apart. Ryan Cooper argues that our society already is falling apart, and the logically preposterous views of neoliberalism are to blame. Most progressives understand this instinctively, but many lack the background knowledge to make effective economic counterarguments.

How Are You Going To Pay For That? is filled with engaging discussions and detailed strategies that policymakers and citizens alike can use to assail even the most entrenched lines of neoliberal logic, and start to undo these long-held misconceptions. Equal parts economic theory, history, and political polemic, this is an essential roadmap for winning the key battles to come."  From Overdrive.

"The political scientist Bruce Bueno de Mesquita also makes bold claims. The title of his book promises that he will explain “The Invention of Power”; his subtitle, more modestly, “The birth of the West”. He sets out his stall in the preface: Western (or European) exceptionalism means the “tolerance, prosperity and freedom” found in the West, and its “foundation” was laid in the Concordat of Worms of 1122.

At first glance, this claim seems highly improbable. The Concordat was an agreement between the pope and the Holy Roman Emperor that regulated the procedure for appointing bishops (similar settlements had been made with the kings of France and England shortly before)."  From TLS.

"The Privatization of Everything chronicles the efforts to turn our public goods—free education, public health, open parks, clean water, and many others—into private profit centers. Ever since Ronald Reagan labeled government a dangerous threat, privatization has touched every aspect of our lives, from water and trash collection to the justice system and the military.

However, citizens can, and are, wresting back what is ours. The Privatization of Everything connects the dots across a broad spectrum of issues and raises larger questions about who controls the public things we all rely on, exposing the hidden crisis of privatization that has been slowly unfolding over the last fifty years and giving us a road map for taking our country back."

This quote comes from the book's website, so read it with that in mind.

Besides the library, I've baked some bread.  The sourdough starter is a much less demanding pet than a dog.

And as part of my moving into to spring and summer activities, I'm nurturing a couple of trays of seedlings.  The pansies got planted early and have been doing nicely.    The broccoli (left) just got planted and the sprouts were up in two days.  There are more still waiting to sprout.  

Outside, the tulip greens are up and the daffodils (left) have poked up this week.  Bleeding hearts and one of the lilies are poking out of the ground too. 

I've been biking.  Last summer's mental trip was Chiang Mai to Bangkok.  I'm trying to work out a trip for my Anchorage riding that goes roughly from Istanbul to, I'm not sure where.  Kyiv?  Or just through Turkey.  Last summer I did about 750 kilometers, so the goal is a little further than that.  I've got about 50 k done already.  Here is Campbell Creek, awakening from winter.  

And a hairy woodpecker - well there were actually two - visited this week.  We've got a number of dead trees on the ground, presumably full of insects.  This is my bird feeder.  

Some of the smaller aspen have been woodpecker targets for a while and have died out.  This one got tangled in the phone and the electric wires going to the house.    I did call Alaska Communications but after a week, I got out the clippers on the pole and cut off the parts that were making it hard to get it untangled and now it too is grounded woodpecker feeder.  

So that's just some of what I've been doing instead of sitting at the computer.  And, I also spotted these license plates this last week.  

So that's it for now.  

The AK Redistricting Board's Amateur Decision Making Process - Plus Marcum and Binkley Reasons For 3B Votes

In my previous post, I put up the video of the meeting where the three Republican Redistricting Board members go through their reasons for choosing Option 3B.  It also includes Board member Borromeo's rejection of those assertions and a plea to Judge Matthews to just fix the map himself and not remand it to the Board because they aren't going to change.  

In the post prior to that I went through Board member Budd Simpson's reasons for supporting Option 3B - as he laid them out in Wednesday's meeting - and pointed out problems I had with his reasons.  I thought this next post I would do the same with member Marcum's and member Binkley's reasons.  (And I do that as sort of an addendum to this post at the bottom.) But it seemed to be more useful to demonstrate that their reasons do not add up to a good, professional decision making exercise.   And in doing that, try to summarize their strategy so it's easier to understand what they did and what they didn't do, in terms of good decision making.  (But I wasn't quite done with it and so I put up the video of that meeting yesterday instead.)

Using a decision making model allows me to establish the flakiness of how they - in their words and actions - decided that Option 3B was the best option.  Because flaky as it might seem to many, the districts they created, while not optimal, could be considered Constitutional by the courts.  That depends on how they interpret "as contiguous as practicable."  Since other criteria, such as deviation and compactness, are applied more strictly in densely populated urban areas than more sparsely populated rural areas, why shouldn't contiguity be treated the same?  It's much easier to be contiguous in a densely populated area.  Will they see that such an urban/rural differentiation makes sense now?  At least in Anchorage.  

But if the Courts view the maps as basically in compliance with the Contiguity requirement, the other way I see that they might block the map is  by deciding it was politically motivated gerrymandering.  Part of the evidence for reaching that  conclusion is to:

• realize that the Board's decision making was haphazard at best,  simply the application of anecdotal evidence to 'prove' the 3B map was the best, because it's not the best on objective measures
• wonder why the majority fought so hard for Senate pairings that ignore the obvious pairings and force together much less natural pairings and  
• conclude there was an unspoken (by the majority) reason - getting another Republican Senate seat.

So first a brief description of what good decision making should NOT look like from a 1998 Harvard Business Review article, The Hidden Traps in Decision Making:

"So where do bad decisions come from? In many cases, they can be traced back to the way the decisions were made—the alternatives were not clearly defined, the right information was not collected, the costs and benefits were not accurately weighed. But sometimes the fault lies not in the decision-making process but rather in the mind of the decision maker. The way the human brain works can sabotage our decisions."

The article is more interested in the problems with the mind of the decision maker, and while I'm sure exploring the hidden biases in brains of the decision makers would yield fascinating results, we don't have to go there to find serious problems with the Redistricting Board's decision to select Option 3B over Option 2.  

If anyone wants to know what went wrong - and it's clear the decision was wrong from a public interest perspective - we need look no further than

1. the alternatives were not clearly defined, 
2. the right information was not collected, 
3. the costs and benefits were not accurately weighed

Click to enlarge
More detailed maps with the Simpson post

1. the alternatives were not clearly defined, 
1. The Board settled into two map options.  
2. One offered by the East Anchorage Plaintiffs - Option 2
3. One offered by Randy Ruedrich - Option 3B
4. They could have made more, but didn't.
5. The 3B Option chose to 
1. Pair north Muldoon (D20) with south Muldoon (D21)
6. That left D22 as an orphan district (not connected to another district to make a Senate district)
1. The two key options were to connect with D24 (to the north above the map) or D9.  Both were connected to other house districts, so both required at least one more change.  
2. Majority basically decided that 24 was not available because it was paired with 23 and they weren't going to change that.  
7. So the next choice was D9.  

So, basically, the majority had only ONE choice - pairing 22 with 9.  So, no, the alternatives were not clearly defined.  

1. [This loose 1. is here because I haven't figured out how to do lists that I can break for a moment and then continue on Blogger.  I even tried to make them white so you can't see them, but they are independent.  There will be more at 3.  If anyone has a suggestion I'm listening.]
2. the right information was not collected, 
1. The only information that the Board collected in any sort of organized way in the whole process was related to maps.  They used the census data and the Autobound software organized that data for the Board
2. The Board collected anecdotes, personal preferences, justifications, but did not pursue collecting data that would help verify which of these vague notions about the Senate seats was accurate
3. The Board was given more anecdotes, personal preferences, and justifications via the public testimony (I've offered a methodology for evaluating that here)
4. The Board received some actual data and information via the public testimony 
5. The majority did not study the data and information that came in.  Rather, they picked things that supported their preference and ignored data that didn't (example:  JBER students going to ER High School.  They cited Lance Pruitt's assertion that ER High School wouldn't exist without JBER.  They ignored Denny Wells statistics that showed more JBER residents live in areas of the bases zoned for West High and Bartlett.  And they never compared how many D9 students went to high schools in D22 or vice versa.)
6. This was a giant gap for the Board.  While they hired technicians for the technical mapping data gathering and organization, the only other professional decision making expertise used for evaluating how well they met the non-numerical criteria for redistricting was to hire the VRA expert. Most of that debate was hidden from the public and I'm guessing led Marcum to pair D22 with D20 because the VRA expert said pairing D22 with D21 (north Muldoon) wouldn't work because of the diversity of that district.  That would have been the majority's ideal pairing because it would have forced popular Democratic Sen Bill Wielechowsk into an Eagle River district.  But that's speculation on my part.  What's key is that they did not remotely follow the three steps of decision making outlined in the excerpt above.

1. 
   
2. 
   
3. the costs and benefits were not accurately weighed
1. The majority never compared the two basic options which were:
1. Pairing  22 and 24  versus pairing 22 and 9
2. Instead, they
1. took pairing 22 and 24 off the table from the beginning and
2. thus made it impossible, in their minds, to pair 22 and 24
3. used anecdotal information to argue the benefits of pairing 22 and 9
4. used anecdotal information to argue why 23 could not be separated from 24
5. used anecdotal information to argue why 23 could not be combined with 17 
6. only looked at data that favored what they wanted and disfavored what they didn't want
3. I say anecdotal because there were reliable or valid numbers available to evaluate,  that could be put into tables that neatly outlined factors that would help them compare how well each pairing met the constitutional criteria. (Actually the only criterion for Senate seats is contiguity, but that didn't stop them from talking about socio-economic integration (9SEI)when they thought it would help their cause.  They pointed out the primacy of contiguity when the proponents of Option 2 discussed SEI.
4. They never gathered objective numbers to fill into the non-existent cost/benefit chart (in this case perhaps advantages/disadvantages chart)

This was not professional decision making.  This was just marshaling claims and assertions to back up a decision that clearly had already been made:  To keep Senate seat L (D23 and D24) intact.  

Why all this effort to pretend that pairing D22 with D9 was the only option they had?  And was far superior to D22 and D24?    And what was the problem with pairing D23 with D17 ( downtown)? In Marcum's words, "Choosing option 2 is an intentional attempt to break up that natural pairing [23/24].  JBER should be with Chugiak." 

But these aren't dumb people.  

The only explanation that makes sense to me is one that the Court already found them guilty of:  political gerrymandering.  The proclamation plan would have given them (and Eagle River) control of two Senate seats.  The Court specifically broke up one of those (D21/D22).  Pairing D22 with D21 gave Eagle River control over a Senate seat that was half a swing district. Pairing D22 with D24 would force them to give up control over another swing district. (D23)  Eagle River would end up with just one solidly red Senate Seat.  So they had to pair D22, not with the obvious match Eagle River seat D24 - a perfect Senate seat by all the normal criteria - but with D9, across the mountains and with no adjoining neighborhoods.  And that would force pulling D9 apart from D10, another reasonable community of interest.  

And that's what they did. Since this doesn't make logical sense from a redistricting perspective and they had to manipulate data to pretend that it did, one has to ask why?   

Is it possible there is another explanation?    Given the attempted gerrymandering the first time around and the fact that this time the three Republican Board members teamed up to support a map made by Randy Ruedrich and voted for that map over the strenuous objections of the other two Board members, it's pretty compelling.  

Addendum:  Based on my notes from the Wednesday, April 13, 2022 Board meeting.

Board Member Bethany Marcum's Reasons for supporting Option 3B

[Board member's comments in black, mine in red]

Marcum:  I’m very uncomfortable with Option 2 because it moves JBER and links it with D17.  It makes the least sense for any possible pairings.  Downtown is the arts and tourism center, that's not what makes up JBER.  It is used to wake up?? the military community.  Choosing option 2 is an intentional intent to break up that natural pairing.  JBER should be with Chugiak.  

It was hard to sit through these comments without putting my hands over my face.  She’s just pulling words and ideas out of the blue here.   Let’s look carefully at the majority’s defense of 3B strategy.  

The first step is to assume the Chugiak/Eagle River(24) and JBER/Government Hill (D23) Senate district is untouchable.  That’s because this is the last district left for them to pull an extra Republican Senator from.  In the same way that the courts found linking (ER) D22 and south Muldoon (21) was political gerrymandering because it ‘cracks’ D21, this pairing ‘cracks’ D23.  

How?  Eagle River is solidly White, comfortably middle class, and Republican, Trump Republican.  It’s the voters who elected Lora Reinbold  and Jamie Allard.    D23 is, in general, lower income, and far more diverse.

Both Simpson and Marcum refer to D23 as the JBER district although 1//3 of the population does not live on JBER.  Other factors:  many military either don’t voter or they vote in their home states.  The JBER precincts had fewer people voting in the last few elections (including 2020) than the non-JBER districts even though they outnumber them 2-1.   So this is a perfect district to pair with a strongly Republican district.  Higher income white neighborhoods have a higher voting percentage than lower income diverse neighborhoods, so Eagle River will dominate Senate races.  As has been pointed out at different times in this process, when a Muldoon house district was paired with ER in the 2011 redistricting process, a popular Senator, and the only black in the State Senate at that time, was handily defeated by ER voters.  

It would appear the Republican majority of the Board is working hard to keep this district for themselves.

So, basically, they start out by putting it to the side, not even to be considered, as they look for a partner house district for a D22 Senate pairing.

But D23 is NOT just JBER.  It’s 1/3  off base, Downtown-adjacent neighborhoods.  

And if JBER and downtown are so different they can’t be paired, why did the Board  make a house district that does just that:  puts downtown in with JBER?  You can’t have it both ways.  It was ok as a house district, but not as a Senate District?

And none of the majority have considered the reverse problem of lumping Government Hill folks in with Eagle River.  If it’s bad one way, then it should be bad the other way.  But that doesn’t help their case.

I’ve been listening to the Redistricting Board debates since December 2020.  I don’t recall people talking about Downtown as the arts and tourism center of Anchorage before and I’m not sure why she thinks the military have no interest in the arts.  They don't go to the museum? They don't go to the Performing Arts Center?  She didn’t mention that downtown is probably the bar/tavern center of Anchorage too because she knows it would be harder to keep a straight face saying the young soldiers don’t spend time in the downtown bars.  

While Marcum has taken umbrage when people have characterized her intent, she has no problem jumping to the conclusion that pairing D23 with downtown is an intentional attempt to break up “the natural pairing” of JBER and Chugiak/Eagle River.  See, it’s just such a natural pairing that it’s off the table when we make these adjustments.  And I suspect that Marcum has convinced herself of this.  The problem is that pairing D22 with D24 is the most natural pairing to be had.  It’s not just me saying that.  Lots of people did, including Dr. Chase Hensel and Dr. Phyllis Morrow.  Dr. Hensel was the expert witness for the East Anchorage plaintiffs.  The two submitted about six pages of testimony about why the two ER districts were a community of interest, the crux is this:

“Because a large data set informs the question of whether and to what degree a population constitutes a community of interest, it can be a judgment call as to where the boundaries of a community of interest lie. In the Eagle River case, however, there is no question: all the signposts point in the same direction.”    

You can read it all in the public testimony listed for April 7-April 8 on pages 327 - 332.  

In that same file there is testimony (pp. 312-316)  from Doug Robbins who offers a long list of references to “Chugiak Eagle River” by the Municipality, by businesses, by Eagle River organizations, to make the point that we all know that Chugiak Eagle River is the most natural pairing.  

Marcum:  Looking back at E Anchorage lawsuit.  Challenged K and L.  L - 23/24, not found to be invalid.  Both are proposals we are not considering.  Both addressed K issue the same way.  It’s what the E Anchorage plaintiffs wanted, satisfactory.  Those individuals still very involved pushing one plan over the other.  Why are they investing themselves in this?  I have to conclude there is political motive.  

I’d have to go back and review the East Anchorage plaintiffs’ suit before commenting on what it did or didn’t do.  

 I have learned over the years that people often project their own thinking and actions on to others.  The Supreme Court found the majority Board members had politically gerrymandered the map.  And so with no proof offered other than they are proposing Option 2, Marcum concludes it’s political.  I’m guessing that she knows that her preference against the common sense pairings, is for political reasons, then opposing her choice must also be for political reasons.  There are other reasons to do things, like fairness and equity in voting.

I didn’t gerrymander.  Here’s why I support pairings.

Courts ruling on Senate K - key response created Muldoon Road district.  

When you put 20 and 21 together, you are left with 22 empty.  The only pairing is D9.  

This is exactly what Simpson said.  The other part of Eagle River (D24), what is known by so many organizations and people as Greater Chugiak and Eagle River, is not an obvious pairing?  Only if you’re locking D24 with D23.  The rational way to proceed is to look at the two adjacent districts - D24 and D9.  When you do that and measure the pairings by every criteria (other than political advantage) then the obvious choice is D24 and D22.  And since it is so obvious, Marcum and Simpson have simply taken that option off the table.  D24 and D23 is a done deal, end of discussion.  So all that is left is D9.  

That leaves 10 without a partner.  ???  That leaves 14 stranded and requires a new pairing.  Take two primary midtown roads.  Four remaining districts 23/24   17/18 same as current    11/12  no changes.  15/16   four changes that result from responding to court ruling and four that remain the same.  

In comparison, Simpson had a set of points and arguments that he went through.  Like Marcum, pairing D22 with D24 was never an option.  So there were never any comparisons of that pairing with the D22/D9 pairing.  Because everything they said about how compatible D22 and D9 are - non-urban neighborhoods, mountainous, wild life encounters (as though those don’t also happen in the Anchorage bowl), fire and snow, service areas for roads - all that is true and a much better match with D24 than D22, as former ER representative/senator Randy Phillips testified.

So let’s move on to Chair John Binkley’s reasons.

Binkley:  Thank you Bethany.  My position.  Then the second round.  Outpouring of public testimony.  Shows me Alaskans are engaged.  Seven different public hearings.  Heard from 100 Anchorage residents.  Heartening that Alaskans care.  People are supportive or opposing one of the other. We step back it’s our job to replace Sen K  - concerned with our pairing of 22 and 21.  Heartening that both proposals repaired that.  It is noteworthy that is how we solved the problem.   

No dispute with them on the process. 

Heard from people that  D22 and D24 should be paired.  Those people are articulate about how ER Chugiak, Peters Creek are closely tied together.  But as Budd pointed out earlier, the two Republican Senators and former Sen President all testified they should be together.  There are factions in the Republican Party who think they should be paired.  Budd mentioned another member of the administration.  Also supported 22 and 24 together.    I take it seriously and those are legitimate moves by people

Let’s give him points for even talking about the D22 and D24 option.  He did not rule it out from the get go.  He likes to ramble a bit and seems to have gotten off the prescribed talking points.

But also heard similarities between 22 and 9.  Both more rural, larger lot sizes.  Single family homes.  Served by road service districts.  Share the Chugach state park.  Close to mountains, deal with wildlife, wildfire danger.  Could be important.  Most house districts are compact and larger districts large rural districts on the outskirts.  Also heard that ER and Hillside were once in a single house districts - met a higher standard.  

The judge said that the Board members’ simple preference doesn’t outweigh the preponderance of public opinion.  Binkley has given us NO hard data to support his feelings about this.  There is no serious comparison of the two possible Senate pairings.  Just words with little or no factual support.  And in the past Eagle River didn't have a big enough population to form two house seats so the population was shared with other house seats.  

I'd also note that nine of the 2021 map districts border Chugach State Park either directly or border other park land that spills into the park.  And no district in town is more than 15 minutes from Chugach State Park.  

JBER in District 23 one of the most compelling.  Extends from D23 into D24.  If underlying house districts different it could have been done differently.  

The only one who recognizes something about how D23 was drawn.  But he doesn’t explain what he means.  Perhaps if they hadn’t made the district 1/3 off base, downtown adjacent?  He also doesn't mention that Government Hill in D23 extends from D23 to D17 (downtown).

Really active and retired military reside in 24 and have that connection to 23.   Direct highway connection Arctic Valley and closer to town.  Also heard testimony to JBER and N Muldoon.  Also legitimate.  Not an option presented to us.   

He’s saying here, I think, that he heard compelling testimony that pairing the JBER with N. Muldoon was another option, but it was “not an option presented to us.”   Excuse me?!  You are chair of the Board.  It’s the Board’s job to create the maps.  Why didn’t you pursue that option yourself if you thought it viable?  Are you saying the Board’s hands are tied? Unless someone else offers an option they can’t entertain it?  

But, of course, the East Anchorage plaintiffs’ preference was to pair the two Muldoon districts, so they didn't  offer it to you.  And the other option was a map which both member Marcum and Randy Ruedrich prepared independently (according to Marcum.)  But if you start with the assumption that  the D24 and D23  pairing is untouchable,  then it wouldn’t be hard to come up with the rest of the maps exactly the same.  

I don’t find compelling the idea of JBER with downtown Anchorage. For 13 years I’ve had a condo here and  been in that district for work and with Alaska RR and in my experience the downtown area part of D23 is dominated by professional services.  

Hearing this, member Borromeo jumped in and said something like, “You deferred Anchorage to Marcum because you said you didn’t know Anchorage well, and only now you are telling us you had a condo in Anchorage for 13 years?

Just moments before Marcum said that Anchorage is the arts and tourism center of Anchorage.  Now it’s portrayed as dominated by professional services.  But no data, no statistics to back up either claim.  Just feelings, personal experience in the past.  I’m not saying that there aren't art galleries and a museum downtown or that there aren’t professional services.  But why does this make the district incompatible with the Base?  There actually wasn't much testimony from the base.  The only person I recall is retired Air Force doctor Felisa Wilson and she said people on the base use their nearest gates and the base should be connected to the part of Anchorage nearest their gate.

Military is a community of interest

Did everyone notice how all three pointed out the commonalities between the pairings they favored and the lack of commonalities between the pairings they opposed?  And how they are long on rhetoric and short on documented evidence?   

I’d point out one more thing.  They’ve spent a lot of time saying that every part of Anchorage is socio-economically integrated to dismiss such comments for house districts and senate pairings they opposed.  But now that’s pretty much their whole argument.  Even though Socio-Economic Integration is a criterion for House districts, but not Senate districts.  Though the related concept of community of interest is considered in Senate districts.

I believe we have two good options.  I’m more comfortable with Option 3B.  I plan to support.

"I feel more comfortable with", not, ‘the preponderance of evidence clearly shows 3B is the plan to support.”  Because the preponderance of evidence goes the other way.  And they did their best to not have any sort of direct, professional comparison of the two key options:  22/24 ER and 22/9 ER/Hillside.

I’d make one final point:  Although the Board members cited the extensive public testimony, there was no serious analysis of that testimony.  I offered a methodology for that there.

Nor did the Board do any serious evaluation of their options.  The Option 2 folks seemed to have gathered more specific reasons.  The Option 3B people, even Simpson’s organized list of reason - had sound bytes and talking points that were based on personal preference rather than any hard data that compared the potential Senate pairings.  And as I said, early on, their strategy was to

Claim Senate District L (23 and 24) as a done deal, the ideal pairing that shouldn’t be touched.

They claimed D23 as the JBER district, even though 1/3 of the district lives off base around downtown and other north Anchorage neighborhoods.  

So their only option left is pairing 22 with 9.  

Me again in black.  There are just so many details that could be added in.  As it is, I'm trying the patience of all but the most obsessed redistricting folks.  The mass of data makes it hard for people who haven't followed closely to see the forest for the trees.  

[UPDATE April 18, 2022, 6pm:  Someone did text me some suggestions for getting into the html code to make my own fix for the numbered list.  Thanks!   Also someone sent to me:  

"Must Read Alaska" is written by a former Republican Party Communications Director in Alaska and runs a sensationalist right wing blog on Alaska politics even though now she apparently lives in Florida.  While Board member Simpson said the fact that some Republican current and former Senators opposed Option 3B proved 3B wasn't partisan, Ms. Downing's headline here seems to acknowledge the obvious.]