URGENT
Safari Club International (SCI), in coordination with Alaska state leadership, is actively pursuing legal and policy changes that undermine tribal sovereignty and subsistence rights in Alaska.
SCI claims that tribal co-management and Indigenous representation on the Federal Subsistence Board would create a “Native preference,” which is a mischaracterization of tribal sovereignty and self-determination. Tribal governments are political entities, not racial groups, and our inclusion is consistent with federal Indian law.
-
Note: Until the docket is posted, you can still submit comments via email:
Email: subsistence@fws.gov
Subject line: “Public Comment on SCI Petition to Revise Subsistence Regulations”
Subject: Opposition to Safari Club International Petition to Revise Federal Subsistence Regulations
To Whom It May Concern,
My name is [Insert Name], and I am a citizen of [Insert Tribal Affiliation]. I am writing to express my strong opposition to the petition submitted by Safari Club International on May 5, 2025, seeking to revise federal subsistence regulations under 36 C.F.R. pt. 100 and pt. 242.
Subsistence is not a sport, it is survival, culture, and sovereignty. The proposed changes would undermine the rural priority established under Title VIII of ANILCA and threaten the food security and cultural practices of Alaska Native communities.
I urge the U.S. Departments of Interior and Agriculture to reject this petition and uphold the federal protections that support Indigenous subsistence rights and tribal co-management.
Sincerely,
[Insert Name]
[Insert Address or Community]
[Insert Date]How to Submit a Public Comment
You can submit your comment in three ways:
1. Online (Preferred Method)
Visit www.regulations.gov
Search for the relevant docket (e.g., “Federal Subsistence Board” or “Subsistence Rulemaking”)
Click on the petition or proposed rule
Use the “Comment” button to submit your feedback
You may attach documents or write directly in the comment box
2. By Email
Send your comment to: subsistence@fws.gov
Subject line: “Public Comment on SCI Petition to Revise Subsistence Regulations”
Include your name, tribal affiliation, and community (optional)
3. By Mail or Hand Delivery
Address:
Federal Subsistence Board Office of Subsistence Management Attn: Theo Matuskowitz 1011 E. Tudor Road, MS-121 Anchorage, AK 99503
-
Key Actions:
2025 Petition to Revise Federal Subsistence Regulations
SCI seeks changes to 36 C.F.R. pt. 100 and pt. 242, threatening Title VIII of ANILCA.
Strong opposition from AVCP, KRITFC, and Alaska Native organizations.
State–SCI Collaboration:
Alaska Department of Fish and Game has echoed SCI’s positions in federal rulemaking.
Joint opposition to adding Native seats to the Federal Subsistence Board.
Support for SB 97, restructuring big game guide concessions to favor corporate outfitters over tribal guides.
Legal Challenges:
SCI v. Haaland: Attempt to overturn federal predator control rules in Kenai Refuge.
Amicus Brief in Sturgeon v. Frost: Challenged federal authority over navigable waters, impacting tribal access.
Implications:
Reduced Indigenous representation in subsistence governance.
Threats to rural and tribal hunting and fishing access.
Erosion of federal protections for Native subsistence rights.
Recommendations for Tribal Leaders:
Monitor and respond to federal rulemaking.
Coordinate with tribal organizations for unified advocacy.
Advocate for Indigenous representation on subsistence boards.
Prepare testimony and community briefings.
Sources:
AVCP/KRITFC Response (2025)
SCI Comments on FSB Membership (2024)
Alaska Legislative Records (SB 97)
Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court rulings
-
Overview:
This briefing summarizes current legal and policy actions by Safari Club International (SCI) in Alaska that impact tribal sovereignty and subsistence rights.
Active Petitions and Policy Actions:
1. Petition to Revise Federal Subsistence Regulations (May 2025):
SCI seeks changes to 36 C.F.R. pt. 100 and pt. 242.
Tribal groups argue this undermines Title VIII of ANILCA.
Response submitted by AVCP and KRITFC.
(https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26187690-2025-06-09-avcp-kritfc-response-to-safari-club-subsistence-rulemaking-petition-of-may-5-2025/)
2. Opposition to Native Seats on Federal Subsistence Board (April 2024):
SCI opposed adding three Native seats.
Claimed ANILCA supports rural, not Native, preference.
(Source: safariclub.org)
3. Support for Senate Bill 97 – Big Game Permit Program:
SCI Alaska Chapter supports restructuring guide concessions.
Critics say it marginalizes tribal and subsistence users.
(Source: akleg.gov)
Litigation:
4. SCI v. Haaland (Kenai Rule Challenge):
Challenged federal predator control restrictions.
Ninth Circuit upheld federal authority under ANILCA.
(Source: law.justia.com)
5. Amicus Brief in Sturgeon v. Frost:
SCI supported challenge to federal authority over navigable waters.
Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sturgeon.
(Source: supremecourt.gov)
Recommendations for Tribal Leaders:
Monitor federal rulemaking and submit formal comments.
Engage with Alaska Native organizations to coordinate responses.
Advocate for Indigenous representation on subsistence boards.
Prepare testimony and briefing materials for legislative hearings.
-
Legal Arguments in the AVCP & KRITFC Response
1. Violation of Title VIII of ANILCA
SCI’s petition seeks to revise federal subsistence regulations in a way that undermines the rural subsistence priority guaranteed under Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA).
The response argues that SCI’s framing of subsistence as a “privilege” rather than a “right” contradicts federal law and decades of legal precedent.
2. Misrepresentation of Tribal Authority
SCI claims that tribal co-management and Indigenous representation on the Federal Subsistence Board would create a “Native preference,” which the response refutes as a mischaracterization of tribal sovereignty and self-determination.
The response emphasizes that tribal governments are political entities, not racial groups, and their inclusion is consistent with federal Indian law.
3. Improper Rulemaking Petition
The response asserts that SCI’s petition fails to meet the standards of administrative rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), lacking sufficient legal justification, stakeholder consultation, and evidence of harm.
4. Threat to Food Security and Cultural Survival
The proposed changes would disproportionately harm Alaska Native communities by restricting access to traditional hunting and fishing grounds, violating federal trust responsibilities and tribal consultation requirements.
Powerful excerpts:
“This petition is a direct attack on the subsistence rights of our people and the legal protections we fought to secure under ANILCA.”
— AVCP Leadership Statement“SCI’s proposal would erase decades of progress toward tribal co-management and Indigenous representation in federal subsistence governance.”
— KRITFC Board Member“Subsistence is not a sport. It is survival, culture, and sovereignty.”
— Joint AVCP/KRITFC Comment“We reject the false narrative that tribal inclusion creates racial preference. Our governments are sovereign, and our voices must be heard.”
— AVCP Legal Counsel -
TRIBAL RESOLUTION NO. [Insert Number Here]
A RESOLUTION OPPOSING SAFARI CLUB INTERNATIONAL'S PETITION TO REVISE FEDERAL SUBSISTENCE REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the [Insert Tribal Government Name] is a federally recognized tribe with inherent sovereignty and a responsibility to protect the subsistence rights and cultural survival of its citizens;
WHEREAS, Safari Club International (SCI) has submitted a petition dated May 5, 2025, seeking to revise federal subsistence regulations under 36 C.F.R. pt. 100 and pt. 242;
WHEREAS, the proposed revisions threaten the rural subsistence priority established under Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA);
WHEREAS, the petition misrepresents tribal co-management and Indigenous representation as racial preference, undermining tribal sovereignty and federal trust responsibilities;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the [Insert Tribal Government Name] formally opposes SCI's petition and calls upon the U.S. Departments of Interior and Agriculture to reject the proposed rulemaking;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall be transmitted to federal agencies, tribal organizations, and advocacy partners to affirm our commitment to protecting subsistence rights and tribal governance.
CERTIFIED this [Insert Date] by the [Insert Tribal Council Name].
[Insert Name], Tribal Council Chair
[Insert Name], Tribal Council Secretary
State Wildlife Management- Board of Game (BOG)
-
What It Is:
The Alaska Board of Game is a seven-member public board that sets hunting and wildlife regulations across the state. Members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the legislature. Each serves a three-year term, and there are no term limits. Importantly, there are no seats designated for Tribes or tribal organizations, despite the board’s decisions directly impacting Indigenous lands, wildlife, and subsistence practices.What the Board Does:
The BOG makes decisions that shape wildlife management statewide. These include:Opening and closing hunting and trapping seasons
Setting bag limits and harvest quotas
Defining legal methods and means for hunting
Establishing game management areas and predator control zones
Making allocative decisions—who gets access to wildlife resources and how much
Setting population objectives and management priorities.
These decisions are regulatory, meaning they become law once adopted. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) is responsible for implementing and enforcing these regulations.
Meeting Cycle & Scope:
The Board meets 2–3 times per year, typically between October and March, rotating locations across Alaska. It follows a three-year regional cycle to review proposals for different wildlife management areas. Emergency actions can be taken outside this cycle if needed.Why It Matters for Tribes:
The Board of Game makes decisions that directly affect moose, caribou, bears, and other culturally and nutritionally vital species. Yet, Tribes currently have no formal representation. Engaging in this system is essential to protect tribal hunting rights, uphold food sovereignty, and ensure that Indigenous knowledge informs sustainable wildlife management. -
What They Are:
Advisory Committees (ACs) are local, volunteer-based groups that provide grassroots input on fish and wildlife management. There are 84 ACs across six regions of Alaska, each representing the unique knowledge, needs, and priorities of their communities. ACs are established by the Joint Board of Fisheries and Game and supported by the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G).What ACs Do:
Develop and review regulatory proposals for the Board of Fisheries and Board of Game
Make formal recommendations on fish and wildlife issues
Provide a local forum for discussion, education, and advocacy
Consult with agencies, organizations, and the public
Share traditional, local, and technical knowledge to inform state decisions.
ACs meet at least twice a year, and meetings are open to the public. Many ACs now offer hybrid or virtual options, making it easier for tribal members and rural residents to participate.
How ACs Influence State Decisions:
ACs are the first line of input into Alaska’s fish and wildlife regulatory system. Their recommendations are forwarded to the Board of Fisheries or Board of Game for consideration. While boards are not required to adopt AC recommendations, they must formally respond if they choose not to follow them.ACs also play a role in emergency closures during established seasons. The ADF&G Commissioner may delegate this authority to ACs, giving them a direct role in protecting local resources.
Why It Matters for Tribes:
ACs are one of the most accessible and impactful ways for Tribes to engage in state fish and wildlife management. They offer a platform to:Advocate for subsistence protections
Elevate Indigenous knowledge and stewardship
Influence decisions before they reach the state boards
Build coalitions with other local users and allies
Tribal members can join ACs, attend meetings, submit proposals, and help shape the future of fish and wildlife management in their region.
-
What It Is:
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game is the state agency responsible for managing Alaska’s fish, wildlife, and habitat resources. ADF&G operates under the Alaska Constitution’s sustained yield principle, meaning it must ensure long-term sustainability of fish and wildlife populations while supporting public use and economic benefit.ADF&G is not a regulatory body, it does not make laws or regulations. Instead, it implements the decisions made by the Board of Fisheries and Board of Game, using biological data, monitoring, and enforcement to manage fish and wildlife across the state.
What the Department Does:
Conducts biological research and stock assessments
Manages hunting, fishing, and trapping seasons based on board regulations
Issues licenses, permits, and harvest reports
Protects habitat through permitting and restoration programs
Provides public education, outreach, and safety training
Supports over 80 local Fish & Game Advisory Committees
Upholds Alaska’s sovereignty in managing its natural resources
ADF&G is organized into five divisions:
Commercial Fisheries
Sport Fish
Wildlife Conservation
Subsistence
Administrative Services
It also includes the Boards Support Section, which facilitates the public process for the Board of Fisheries and Board of Game.
Why It Matters for Tribes:
ADF&G plays a central role in how fish and wildlife are managed day-to-day, including subsistence access, predator control, and habitat protection. While the agency does consult with Tribes, there is no formal co-management structure at the state level. Tribal advocates can work with ADF&G staff, biologists, and regional coordinators to share Indigenous knowledge, raise concerns, and build relationships that influence management decisions. -
What It Is:
The proposal process is how Alaska residents, including Tribes, tribal organizations, advisory committees, and individuals, can formally suggest changes to state regulations governing hunting, trapping, and fishing. These proposals can address subsistence access, conservation concerns, predator control, gear types, seasons, quotas, and more.This is one of the most direct ways to influence wildlife and fisheries policy and assert tribal stewardship.
Step-by-Step Overview:
1. Call for Proposals
Each board operates on a three-year regional cycle, reviewing regulations by geographic area. A Call for Proposals is issued before each cycle, outlining:
What topics are open for change
Which regions or species are under review
The submission deadline
2. Write Your Proposal
Use the official proposal form for the relevant board. You’ll need to:
Clearly describe the issue and your proposed change
Explain why the change is needed (biological, cultural, or practical reasons)
Include your name, organization (if applicable), contact info, and specify the region or Game Management Unit (GMU) or fishery affected
Tip: Work with your local Fish & Game Advisory Committee to strengthen your proposal. These committees often submit proposals and their support can influence the Board’s decisions.
3. Submit Your Proposal
You can submit proposals:
Online via the Boards Support website
By mail to ADF&G Boards Support Section, P.O. Box 115526, Juneau, AK 99811-5526
By fax to (907) 465-6094
Attachments like maps or photos are allowed, but web links and multimedia will not be included in the official proposal book.
4. Proposal Review & Publication
After the deadline:
Proposals are compiled into a Proposal Book and distributed statewide
Advisory Committees, ADF&G staff, and the public review and comment
Written comments are accepted up to two weeks before the meeting where the proposal will be heard
5. Board Meetings & Deliberation
At the board meeting:
ADF&G staff present biological and management info
Advisory Committees share recommendations
The public can testify in person
The Board deliberates and votes to adopt, reject, or amend proposals
Approved proposals become regulations after legal review.
Other Ways to Submit Proposals
Agenda Change Requests (ACRs)
If your issue is urgent and not part of the current cycle, you can submit an ACR. These are reviewed in a special teleconference meeting.
Emergency Petitions
In rare cases, you can submit an emergency petition if a situation meets strict criteria for immediate action. These are rarely approved but can be powerful when justified.
Why It Matters for Tribes:
This process allows Tribes to advocate for subsistence protections, integrate Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), and challenge inequitable regulations. Tribal proposals can shape policy, assert sovereignty, and ensure Indigenous voices are heard in wildlife and fisheries management. -
What It Does:
This article enshrines Alaska’s commitment to public access and sustainable use of natural resources. Key provisions include:§ 2: Resources must be managed for the maximum benefit of the people.
§ 3: Fish and wildlife are reserved for common use.
§ 4: Resources must be managed on a sustained yield basis.
§ 15: No exclusive right of fishery, though limited entry is allowed for conservation and economic reasons.
Why It Matters for Tribes:
While the Constitution supports public access and sustainability, it does not recognize a subsistence priority for rural or Indigenous users under state law, creating tension with ANILCA. -
Key Sections:
AS 16.05.221: Establishes the Boards of Fisheries and Game, each with seven members appointed by the Governor.
AS 16.05.251 (BOF) & AS 16.05.255 (BOG): Grants regulatory authority to adopt rules on seasons, bag limits, gear types, and conservation areas.
AS 16.05.260: Establishes the Advisory Committee system for local input.
AS 16.05.258: Addresses subsistence use areas and joint board actions.
Why It Matters for Tribes:
These statutes define how fish and wildlife are managed at the state level. They do not guarantee tribal representation on the boards, and Alaska’s subsistence law does not align with ANILCA’s rural priority. Tribal advocates must engage through proposals, testimony, and advisory committees to influence these systems.
Federal Wildlife Management
-
What It Is:
The Federal Subsistence Board is the decision-making body that oversees the Federal Subsistence Management Program in Alaska. It was established under Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) to ensure that rural Alaskans have priority access to fish and wildlife for subsistence on federal public lands and waters.What the Board Does:
The FSB sets regulations for subsistence hunting, fishing, and trapping on federal lands in Alaska. Its responsibilities include:Opening and closing seasons
Setting harvest limits and gear restrictions
Making Customary & Traditional Use (C&T) determinations
Defining rural and non-rural areas
Responding to emergency requests and special actions
Reviewing proposals and public comments
Ensuring compliance with ANILCA’s subsistence priority
Board Composition:
The FSB includes both federal agency representatives and public members:Federal Members:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Park Service
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Indian Affairs
U.S. Forest Service
Public Members:
Five rural subsistence users, including three nominated by federally recognized Tribes in Alaska
Chairperson with direct experience in rural subsistence, appointed by the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture
How Tribes Can Engage:
Nominate Board Members:
Federally recognized Tribes can nominate public members to serve on the FSB, ensuring Indigenous representation and lived experience in decision-making.Submit Proposals:
Tribes and tribal organizations can submit proposals to change federal subsistence regulations. These are reviewed on a two-year cycle (odd years for fish/shellfish, even years for wildlife).Participate in Regional Advisory Councils (RACs):
There are 10 RACs across Alaska. These councils advise the FSB and include tribal members. They hold public meetings twice a year.Request Special Actions or Reconsiderations:
Tribes can submit emergency requests, cultural permits, or ask the Board to reconsider decisions.Engage in Tribal Consultation:
The FSB and Office of Subsistence Management (OSM) conduct formal consultations with Tribes on policy changes, regulations, and priorities.Why It Matters for Tribes:
The FSB is the only regulatory body in Alaska with formal tribal representation. It manages subsistence on federal lands, which are often the last refuge for Indigenous hunting and fishing rights. Tribal engagement ensures that Indigenous Knowledge, food sovereignty, and cultural practices are protected in federal decision-making. -
What They Are:
Regional Advisory Councils are federally chartered bodies that give rural Alaskans—especially subsistence users—a formal voice in managing fish and wildlife on federal public lands. There are 10 RACs across Alaska, each representing a distinct geographic region.They were created under Title VIII of ANILCA to ensure that local knowledge and subsistence priorities guide federal decision-making.
Key Roles of RACs:
Advise the Federal Subsistence Board (FSB) on regulations, closures, and special actions
Review and recommend on proposals affecting subsistence use
Provide a public forum for subsistence concerns and community input
Submit annual reports to the FSB
Participate in tribal consultations and fisheries monitoring plans
Make determinations on customary and traditional use, rural status, and resource allocation when restrictions are needed
Council Composition:
Each RAC has 10–13 members
At least 70% must be subsistence users; the remaining may represent sport or commercial interests
Members are Alaska residents with knowledge of local subsistence practices
Appointed by the Secretary of the Interior, with input from the Secretary of Agriculture
Serve 3-year terms and typically meet twice a year for 3–5 days
Why It Matters for Tribes:
RACs are one of the few formal venues where Indigenous knowledge and subsistence priorities are given deference in federal management decisions
Under Section 805(c) of ANILCA, the Federal Subsistence Board must give deference to RAC recommendations unless there is a clear reason not to [doi.gov]
RACs help ensure that subsistence users—not just agencies—shape policy affecting their lands, waters, and food systems
-
What It Is:
The Department of the Interior (DOI) is the federal agency responsible for managing the United States’ public lands, natural resources, and upholding the federal trust responsibility to American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes. In Alaska, DOI plays a central role in subsistence management, tribal consultation, and co-stewardship of fish and wildlife.DOI’s Role in Alaska Subsistence & Wildlife Management
DOI oversees several bureaus and programs that directly impact Alaska Native communities:
Office of Subsistence Management (OSM): Administers the Federal Subsistence Management Program and supports the Federal Subsistence Board (FSB) and Regional Advisory Councils. [doi.gov]
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS): Manages wildlife refuges and endangered species, and supports tribal co-stewardship and subsistence protections. [fws.gov]
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA): Provides funding, technical assistance, and advocacy for tribal subsistence rights and natural resource management. [bia.gov]
Bureau of Land Management (BLM): Oversees millions of acres of federal land in Alaska, including areas used for subsistence hunting and fishing.
Federal Subsistence Management Program
DOI jointly administers the Federal Subsistence Management Program with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This program was created under Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) to ensure rural residents—especially Alaska Natives—have priority access to fish and wildlife for subsistence on federal lands. [bia.gov]
Key Components:
Federal Subsistence Board (FSB): Makes regulatory decisions for subsistence use on federal lands.
Regional Advisory Councils (RACs): Provide local input and recommendations.
OSM Staff: Includes biologists, anthropologists, and tribal liaisons who support the regulatory process and tribal engagement.
Tribal Engagement & Co-Stewardship
DOI is legally and ethically committed to government-to-government consultation with Tribes. Under Executive Order 13175 and Secretarial Orders 3403 and 3413, DOI must:
Consult Tribes on decisions affecting subsistence, land, and wildlife
Support tribal co-management and co-stewardship agreements
Incorporate Indigenous Knowledge into federal decision-making [fws.gov]
In 2024, DOI strengthened tribal representation on the Federal Subsistence Board by adding three new seats nominated by Alaska Tribes, ensuring Indigenous voices are central to subsistence policy. [usda.gov]
Recent Changes
In 2025, DOI transferred the Office of Subsistence Management from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management, and Budget, elevating its visibility and independence. This change was made in response to tribal advocacy and aims to improve responsiveness to Alaska Native subsistence needs.
Why It Matters for Tribes:
DOI decisions directly affect access to fish, wildlife, and lands that are vital to Alaska Native cultures, food security, and sovereignty. Tribal advocates can engage with DOI through:Proposal submissions to the Federal Subsistence Board
Tribal consultations and listening sessions
Co-management agreements
Funding opportunities for subsistence research and restoration
-
The FSB manages subsistence hunting, trapping, and fishing on federal public lands and waters in Alaska under ANILCA Title VIII. It oversees regulations, customary and traditional use determinations, and prioritizes rural subsistence users.
Ways to Engage:
1. Submit a Proposal to Change Federal Subsistence Regulations
Anyone (including Tribes) can submit proposals to change:
Season dates
Harvest limits
Methods and means
Customary and traditional use determinations
Wildlife Proposals: Accepted in odd-numbered years
Fisheries Proposals: Accepted in even-numbered years
Proposal windows open for at least 30 days in late winterHow to Submit:
By mail or hand delivery:
Office of Subsistence Management
Attn: Regulations
1011 E. Tudor Road, MS-121
Anchorage, AK 99503Online:regulations.gov
At Regional Advisory Council meetings
What to Include:
Your name and contact info
Organization (if applicable)
Species and management unit
Current regulation (or state “new regulation”)
Proposed language
Justification and supporting info
2. Special Action Requests
For urgent or temporary changes outside the regular cycle.
Must meet criteria for conservation, public safety, or subsistence need.
3. Request for Reconsideration
If a proposal is denied, Tribes can request reconsideration with new evidence or justification.
4. Participate in Regional Advisory Council (RAC) Meetings
RACs review proposals and make recommendations to the FSB.
Tribes can testify, submit comments, and serve on RACs.
Why It Matters for Tribes:
Federal proposal processes allow Tribes to shape subsistence policy, protect access to culturally vital species, and assert stewardship. These systems prioritize rural subsistence users, but tribal engagement ensures Indigenous knowledge and rights are respected. -
Citation: Public Law 96-487 (1980)
What It Does:
ANILCA protected over 100 million acres of federal land in Alaska and created a rural subsistence priority on federal lands and waters. Title VIII:Guarantees subsistence access for rural residents
Created the Federal Subsistence Board (FSB) and Regional Advisory Councils (RACs)
Requires federal agencies to consider subsistence in land use decisions
Why It Matters for Tribes:
ANILCA is the strongest federal protection for subsistence, but it defines eligibility by rural status, not tribal affiliation. Tribes must engage in FSB proposals, RACs, and consultation to ensure Indigenous rights are upheld. -
Citation: Public Law 92-203 (1971)
What It Does:
ANCSA extinguished Alaska Native land claims and created 12 regional and over 200 village corporations to receive 44 million acres and $962.5 million. It:Replaced reservations with corporate land ownership
Did not protect hunting and fishing rights
Created a complex system of surface and subsurface land ownership
Why It Matters for Tribes:
ANCSA left many Tribes landless and without guaranteed subsistence rights. It shifted tribal governance toward corporate structures, complicating sovereignty and stewardship. ANILCA was later passed to address subsistence gaps left by ANCSA. -
Passed: 1973
What It Does:
ESA protects species at risk of extinction and their habitats. It requires:Federal agencies to consult with NOAA or FWS before actions that may affect listed species
Consideration of tribal conservation plans and impacts on tribal lands
Why It Matters for Tribes:
ESA can restrict subsistence access if species are listed. Tribes can engage through Section 7 consultations, submit conservation plans, and apply for funding to support ESA compliance and habitat restoration. -
Issued: 2000
What It Does:
EO 13175 requires federal agencies to:Consult Tribes on policies with tribal implications
Respect tribal sovereignty and the government-to-government relationship
Avoid unfunded mandates and preemption of tribal law
Why It Matters for Tribes:
EO 13175 is the foundation for tribal consultation across all federal agencies. It ensures Tribes have a voice in decisions affecting subsistence, land, and culture. Agencies must develop consultation plans and designate tribal liaisons.