On January 12, the US Supreme Court denied the State of Alaska’s petition to review United States v. Alaska (No. 25-320.) The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against the state in a suit brought by The Kuskokwim River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, the Association of Village Council Presidents, Betty Magnuson, Ivan M. Ivan, Ahtna Tene Nené, Ahtna, Incorporated and the Alaska Federation of Natives, acting as intervenors for the United States of America.
The 2021 suit claimed the State of Alaska had violated the terms of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) with an Emergency Order opening subsistence salmon fishing on the Kuskokwim River to “All Alaskans,” in opposition to the federal closure of the Kuskokwim River to salmon fishing except for qualified federal subsistence users.
Title VIII of ANILCA states, “nonwasteful subsistence uses of fish and wildlife and other renewable resources shall be the priority consumptive uses of all such resources on the public lands of Alaska. When it is necessary to restrict taking in order to assure the continued viability of a fish or wildlife population or the continuation of subsistence uses of such population, the taking of such population for nonwasteful subsistence uses shall be given preference on the public lands over other consumptive uses.”
The State of Alaska did not deny the legitimacy of Title VIII, but argued that the state can exert jurisdiction over “navigable waters within federal conservation units,” and therefore management in these waters is subject to state and not federal laws.
A press release issued by the Alaska Department of Law in September, when the State filed the petition to the US Supreme Court, stated, “The Supreme Court has already addressed issues similar to this twice before, in Sturgeon v. Frost (2016 and 2019). In the 2019 decision, the Court ruled that the National Park Service could not enforce federal regulations—such as a ban on hovercrafts—on Alaska’s navigable waters within federal conservation units. In doing so, it held that these waters are not “public lands” under ANILCA, and thus not subject to federal control.”
The State argued that the Sturgeon cases overruled the landmark Katie John trilogy of cases.
Support stories about what matters most to the Copper Basin. Local subscriptions are just $20.
In the ruling made by the Alaska District Court and upheld by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the court made a distinction between Title I of ANILCA, on which the Sturgeon cases were based, and Title VIII of ANILCA, on which the Katie John cases were based. Both courts ruled that the Sturgeon cases did not overrule the Katie John decisions.
In her Opinion on the case, Ninth Circuit Court Judge Consuelo Callahan noted the Supreme Court included a footnote in Sturgeon II stating, “[Title VIII’s subsistence-fishing] provisions are not at issue in this case, and we therefore do not disturb the Ninth Circuit’s holdings [in the Katie John Trilogy] that the Park Service may regulate subsistence fishing on navigable waters.”
In a press release issued by Ahtna, Inc, Clint Marshall, Ahtna, Inc. Board Chairman stated, “This is a huge win for our people and all rural Alaskans who depend on subsistence fishing for food, culture, and survival.” He continued, “The Supreme Court’s decision confirms what courts have recognized for more than 30 years: Congress made a clear promise in ANILCA, and that promise must be honored.”
Ahtna, Inc President Michelle Anderson stated, “For Ahtna, this case is deeply personal. The supreme court’s refusal to reopen this issue honors Katie John’s legacy and the many other Ahtna Elders who have worked hard to protect Ahtna’s hunting and fishing rights.” She later continued, “Dual management is challenging, but the solution is not to strip away subsistence protections. The path forward must be built on consultation, science, and respect for Indigenous knowledge and ways of life.”
I reached out to Governor Dunleavy’s office for a statement on the date of the decision (January 12). His office did not respond by our Tuesday, January 13 morning press time.
Disclosure: Athna, Inc. is a Copper River Record advertiser. This did not influence our coverage of this story.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here