Subsistence review by USDA raises concerns in Southeast Alaska
- Daily Sitka Sentinel
- 4 minutes ago
- 5 min read
Some residents say it may undermine subsistence harvest rights in the state; public comment period open until Feb. 13
By Anna Laffrey
Daily Sitka Sentinel
Southeast Alaskans are sounding the alarm about a 60-day review of the Federal Subsistence Management Program that the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Interior are currently conducting in Alaska.
A public comment period is open through Feb. 13.
The review targets seven "topics" foundational to the decision-making bodies, processes and actions of the federal subsistence management program for Alaska.
Some Alaskans say the review could ultimately lead to regulatory changes that would undermine subsistence harvest rights in the state.
"It's a huge threat to rural communities," said Calvin Casipit of Gustavus, who is vice-chair of the federal subsistence Regional Advisory Council for Southeast Alaska. Casipit has been involved with the federal subsistence management program since its inception in 1990.
The federal subsistence management program provides a harvest priority on federal lands for Alaskans who reside in communities designated as "rural," particularly when a population of a given fish or wildlife species declines and harvests must be restricted.
The federal departments of Agriculture and Interior initiated their review of the subsistence program on Dec. 15 in response to President Trump's Jan. 20, 2025, executive order titled "Unleashing Alaska's Resource Potential," as well as a petition that the Safari Club International filed with the federal government on May 5, 2025, which asks the federal government to "rein in" the subsistence program.
Casipit said that he's most concerned that the Trump administration's review of the program could affect the composition of the Regional Advisory Councils, whose members provide local knowledge and make recommendations that get deference from the Federal Subsistence Board.
He said he's worried the review could lead to removal of the six Alaskans who serve on the federal board, leaving five politically-appointed agency heads as the only members of the board, and could result in federal program leaders being required to give deference to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
The Safari Club, a large, Texas-based sport-hunting organization that has frequently sided with the state in lawsuits against the federal government, requested those changes in its petition last year.
"I can see a lot of damage being done," Casipit said of the federal subsistence program review. The federal secretaries "wouldn’t even have to go through a proposed rule to really damage the program, they could just decide to unfund it, and they’ve already been doing that to an extent."
He noted that, during Trump's previous term as president, the federal secretaries did not appoint members to fill seats on the subsistence Regional Advisory Councils, and so many of the Councils could not meet quorum.
Casipit said that the Southeast Regional Advisory Council is currently finalizing its written comments regarding the Trump administration's review of the program. Other groups such as the Alaska Federation of Natives and Sitka Conservation Society have raised concerns about the potential impact of the review and have solicited public comments from Alaska residents.
During a meeting in December, the Southeast Council members heard from Kara Moriarty, who works with the Department of Interior in Anchorage, about the review of the federal subsistence program.
Moriarty said that the federal government has heard requests from the Safari Club and state leaders to make major changes to the federal subsistence program. She recognized that many Alaska residents would oppose such changes, especially residents of "rural" communities who qualify to harvest under the federal subsistence management program.
"Because we're hearing such divergent views from a variety of users, we felt it was our responsibility to do this review," Moriarty said.
"We could have gone straight to a (federal) rule-making process, or not, but again, we felt it was our responsibility as we're reviewing all types of programs across the federal government as directed by the President, and the federal subsistence program is no different," Moriarty said. "This is an opportunity for folks like you to tell us what you think about how the (federal subsistence) program is working."
Following Moriarty's presentation, Ketchikan Indian Community President Gloria Burns expressed concern about the federal program review that follows closely with the Safari Club request.
Burns rejected the idea of the federal government giving deference to the state about its management of fish and wildlife harvests on federal public lands, noting that the state does not provide a harvest priority for rural Alaskans.
William Micklin, an executive council member for the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, spoke to the provisions of the Alaska National Interest Land Claims Act, which in 1980 established the subsistence priority for rural Alaska residents.
Micklin said that Title 8 of the act "imposes a clear legal obligation on our federal partners, and which the state of Alaska needs to respect, observe, and comply with."
"Subsistence uses must be prioritized over all other consumptive uses," Micklin said in public comment. "This is not discretionary and does not require balancing against recreational or trophy hunting interests.
"Subsistence governance must remain grounded in our lived experience," Micklin said.
In Council discussions, Southeast Regional Advisory Council member Patricia Phillips of Pelican underscored the importance of the independent federal subsistence program that provides a priority for rural Alaskans.
"We need (harvest priority) for the local residents that utilize this resource because they have limited resources," Phillips said.
"Many of the villages in Alaska are rural, and many of them are Alaska Native," said Phillips, who has served on the Council since 1993. "It was the intent of Congress to meet the needs of the rural and Alaska Native people."
A comment period is open until Feb. 13 as part of the federal government's review of the subsistence program for Alaska, which is noticed in the Federal Register under the docket number DOI-2025-0170.
Comments can be submitted via the Federal Register posting https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOI-2025-0170-0001, or by email to subsistence@ios.doi.gov.
The Sitka Conservation Society offers a comment tool for those who are concerned that the program review could harm the subsistence rights of rural Alaskans. That tool is available at sitkawild.quorum.us/campaign/153239/.
History of the subsistence program
The federal subsistence program emerged after the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, which extinguished Indigenous hunting and fishing rights to all lands in Alaska and transferred 44 million acres of federal lands to regional and village corporations to be held by Alaska Native people.
Congress later passed the Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act in 1980, which includes Section 804 creating a subsistence priority for "rural Alaska residents," and Section 805 establishing the Regional Advisory Councils to the federal program.
With ANILCA, the U.S. Congress did not enact the Alaska Native preference that it discussed ahead of ANCSA, but rather established the rural priority with Section 804.
Following ANILCA, the State of Alaska in 1986 revised its subsistence law and defined criteria for "rural areas" of Alaska.
But the Alaska Supreme Court ruled in the 1989 case McDowell v. State of Alaska that the state statute for rural preference violated the Alaska Constitution because it created exclusive privileges for the take of fish and wildlife.
As a result, the state fell out of compliance with ANILCA, prompting the federal Departments of Agriculture and Interior in 1990 to create the Federal Subsistence Management Program, establishing dual state and federal management of fish and wildlife in Alaska.
A Federal Subsistence Board formed to make decisions for the FSMP; the Board in 1992 was composed of a chair appointed by the Secretary of Interior and the Alaska directors for USFWS, NPS, USFS, BLM and the BIA.
Today, roughly 60 percent of Alaska is federal land and subject to federal subsistence regulations.
• This story originally appeared in the Daily Sitka Sentinel.
