Why did the US acquire Alaska?

Answer 1

My Grandfather was an official who worked under both the Department of Fish and Wildlife and with the Department of the Interior, which were under one umbrella back when Alaska was still just a Territory during the FDR administration. He was based in Juneau and traveled extensively throughout all of Alaska with the then Governor of the Territory (Gruening). His job was the appraisal and assessment of the region primarily as a natural resource to the US. My Dad, in addition to being directly plugged via his father into the details on the ground, was a history teacher for forty years. He tells me that the push for Alaska to be granted statehood was based largely on its value as a source of Natural Resources to our nation. Concerns for national security with its proximity to Russia were being largely attended to adequately with its territorial status. Ironically, it is our continued access to the state's resources which is one of the most hotly debated issues of our time. The people of Alaska for the most part, favor tapping these resources. The environmental lobby opposes that. Over the years, there has been an intermittent state movement for secession and independence from the US. One might presume that land use might be one of the local populists arguments in favor of their independence.

A lucid and great piece of history which fails to answer the WHY of the purchase. American settlers were flooding into the Oregon Territory and the US did not have primary claim to that Territory. The US was War Tired after the US Civil War and acquired Alaska by purchasing it from Russia in 1867 for 7.2 million dollars as a means of clearing any Russian Claims in what is now the US States of California, Washington and Oregon. Alaska, despite its undisclosed mineral wealth was a sideshow. The US wanted Russia out of North America and a clean claim to the Oregon Territory.

Answer 2

My Grandfather was an official who worked under both the Department of Fish and Wildlife and with the Department of the Interior, which were under one umbrella back when Alaska was still just a Territory during the FDR administration. He was based in Juneau and traveled extensively throughout all of Alaska with the then Governor of the Territory (Gruening). His job was the appraisal and assessment of the region primarily as a natural resource to the US. My Dad, in addition to being directly plugged via his father into the details on the ground, was a history teacher for forty years. He tells me that the push for Alaska to be granted statehood was based largely on its value as a source of Natural Resources to our nation. Concerns for national security with its proximity to Russia were being largely attended to adequately with its territorial status. Ironically, it is our continued access to the state's resources which is one of the most hotly debated issues of our time. The people of Alaska for the most part, favor tapping these resources. The environmental lobby opposes that. Over the years, there has been an intermittent state movement for secession and independence from the US. One might presume that land use might be one of the local populists arguments in favor of their independence.

A lucid and great piece of history which fails to answer the WHY of the purchase. American settlers were flooding into the Oregon Territory and the US did not have primary claim to that Territory. The US was War Tired after the US Civil War and acquired Alaska by purchasing it from Russia in 1867 for 7.2 million dollars as a means of clearing any Russian Claims in what is now the US States of California, Washington and Oregon. Alaska, despite its undisclosed mineral wealth was a sideshow. The US wanted Russia out of North America and a clean claim to the Oregon Territory.