Subsistence News-11/17/95

To   Subsistence 2

From:      Larry Roberts

Postmark:  Nov 13,95  3:40 PM          Delivered: Nov 13,95  3:40 PM

Subject: Subsistence News-11/17/95

—————————————————————————–

Message:

*Alaska’s Lt. Governor, Fran Ulmer, wants to describe her “quiet diplomacy” approach to the subsistence dilemma as a “concept” rather than a plan. Her concept includes: possible amendments to the state constitution; amendments to the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA); and other possible changes to state fish and game regulations.

*One of the changes considered in the ongoing subsistence debate is the proposal to amend Section 807 of ANILCA. The current section of the law deals with judicial enforcement. As currently written, if the State or Federal govt. do not fulfill their legal obligations under the law, individuals are allowed the opportunity to pursue legal recourse in the US District Court. The State of Alaska would like to modify or eliminate this provision of the law. At this time, it is unlikely that Section 807 of ANILCA would be modified by Congress.

*A common myth associated with the subsistence debate is that the state compact guarantees the State control of fish and game on federal lands. This myth assumes the Alaska State Constitution has supremacy over ANILCA. For such an argument to succeed, federal courts would need to conclude that the State Constitution was forever supreme over federal law. This is highly unlikely.

Subsistence News-11/9/95

To   Subsistence 2

From:      Larry Roberts

Postmark:  Nov 09,95  8:33 AM          Delivered: Nov 09,95  8:33 AM

Subject: Subsistence News-11/9/95

—————————————————————————–

Message:

*There is cautious optimism by some within the Governor’s office that a legislative remedy may be at hand for the ongoing subsistence impasse. Some believe the Lt. Governor’s “quiet diplomacy” may result in a legislative endorsement for a possible state constitutional amendment and ballot measure before the Dec. 31th deadline.

*The approach for the possible state legislative solution to the subsistence debate appears to include existing state laws, including non-subsistence areas, but would also add a residence based preference system that would require a state constitutional amendment.

*Amendments to Title VIII (Subsistence Management and Use) of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (1980) are also possible under the proposed remedy for the state’s subsistence impasse. Under the proposal, the subsistence preference would be retained, but would also be extended to qualified non-rural residents.

*Under the proposal, the state would be able to change rural designations in the future as community characteristics change.

*The proposal would require legislative action by the state and Congress. Some believe there is a better chance for the proposals success in 1996, than in the 1998 gubernatorial election year.



Subsistence News-11/3/95

To   Subsistence 2

From:      Larry Roberts

Postmark:  Nov 01,95  9:28 AM          Delivered: Nov 01,95  9:28 AM

Subject: Subsistence News-11/3/95

—————————————————————————–

Message:

*Fran Ulmer, Alaska’s Liet. Governor, recently provided some clarification on the intricacies of Alaska’s subsistence dilemma. Ulmer responded to the following point:”Subsistence is not and should not be limited to traditional methods and means”. Ulmer’s response: “Some insist that subsistence harvest methods should exclude use of rifles, snow machines, and other modern technology. Insistence on pre-contact Native harvest methods is not only impractical, it could very well produce unintended consequences. Fish traps, hunting with snares, and other traditional harvest methods are very effective and do not discriminate among species. Also, the rural preference is not limited to Natives.”

*The next Southcentral Federal Regional Advisory Council (RAC) meeting is scheduled for Cordova, Alaska, Feb.5-7, 1996.

*The Southeast RAC meeting is set for Wrangell, Alaska, Feb.8-10, 1996.

*The Katie John v. U.S. and Alaska litigation alleges that the federal subsistence program has restricted the defendants from fishing in navigable waters. As a result, within the next 14 months, the “Forest Service may be handed subsistence fisheries management responsibility that could cost as much as $15 million annually.”