Postmark: Dec 15,94 2:49 PM Delivered: Dec 16,94 10:00 AM
Status: Previously read
Subject: Subsistence News-12/16/94
—————————————————————————–
Message:
*The Federal Subsistence Board (FSB) makes rural determinations based on communities or areas that are economically and socially integrated.
*The FSB initially adopted the State of Alaska’s “customary and traditional use” (C&T) determinations as they existed in 1990. Not long afterwards, the FSB concluded that some of the state’s determinations should be reconsidered based on more recent information.
*By 1994, the FSB began refining the C&T criteria and identifying areas to reconsider. The first of these areas to be reconsidered: the Kenai Peninsula, and Upper Tanana-Copper River Region.
*Several interim C&T determinations have been made by the FSB, and several have been denied.
*Historically, the state of Alaska interpreted ANILCA 804 as providing necessary differentiation among subsistence users based on dependence, local residence or proximity, and alternative resources.
*Some hold that the ANILCA 804 process would not apply until there was a shortage among subsistence users.
Postmark: Dec 15,94 8:20 AM Delivered: Dec 16,94 10:00 AM
Status: Previously read
Subject: Subsistence News-12/16/94
—————————————————————————–
Message:
*Proposal booklets for the 1995-96 Federal Subsistence season and bag limit regs are currently at the printers and should be delivered to Alaska federal, state, and local offices this week. Five of the proposals deal with southeast Alaska: proxy deer hunting; Yakutat proxy moose hunt; Prince of Wales area doe hunt; and a Chichagof Island marten trapping proposal.
*Keith Goltz, DOI Solicitor, has reviewed the FS draft subsistence philosophy which reflects a broader interpretation of Customary and Traditional (C&T) use eligibility for rural residents. He feels the FS position closely follows the intent of ANILCA Title VIII.
*Goltz appears to believe that C&T is not meant to limit subsistence among subsistence users, or even between communities as the State of Alaska has done in the past, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposes at present.
*Presently, the FS position on C&T centers on previous FSB determinations for “rural”, and that these rural communities would have some level of C&T use associated with such a determination (Tier 1). Annual season and bag limit regs allow the FSB to allocate resources to rural communities. Therefore, the ANILCA 804 process would not apply until a shortage among subsistence users (Tier II).
Postmark: Dec 07,94 3:04 PM Delivered: Dec 09,94 9:59 AM
Status: Previously read
Subject: Subsistence News-12/9/94
—————————————————————————–
Message:
*The more Alaska subsistence can be defined and treated as a social issue involving the conservancy and allocation of resources, rather than as a conflict of fundamental values, the more likely it is that solutions can be reached.
*Even with the election of Tony Knowles as Alaska’s new governor, Subsistence in Alaska is likely to remain in a dual system of state-federal management because of two separate constitutional foundations: the state commitment to equal rights, and the federal governments trust responsibility for Alaska Natives.
*There are many who suggest that Native and rural residents are better served by this dual state-federal system. Under the dual system, federal courts reinforce federal managers following mandates specified under ANILCA.
*Many believe that if a rural preference were adopted by the state of Alaska, state managers would continue to be responsive to sport and commerical interests despite a constitutional exception. Protection for rural residents would then fall to the federal courts for relief.
