Federal appeals court upholds emergency subsistence hunt in Southeast Alaska village of Kake
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the board which regulates subsistence hunting on federal lands within Alaska acted legally when it created an emergency hunt for a Southeast Alaska village during the COVID-19 pandemic emergency.
The order, issued Monday, is the latest chapter of a five-year-old legal dispute stemming from a hunt authorized by the Federal Subsistence Board because the emergency in 2020 disrupted the normal food supply for the Southeast Alaska village of Kake.
The emergency hunt resulted in the harvest of two moose and five deer, which were distributed to local residents.
The state of Alaska later sued the board, arguing that approving the emergency hunt was beyond its authority and that the board acted inappropriately by delegating the hunt's administration to the Kake tribe.
The Organized Village of Kake joined the lawsuit on the side of the Federal Subsistence board.
The state's initial lawsuit was ruled moot by U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason, but the 9th Circuit overturned that decision and sent the case back to Gleason, who ruled partially in favor of the state and partially in favor of the board.
The state appealed again to the 9th Circuit, but on Tuesday, federal judges Carlos Bea (appointed by George W. Bush), Lucy Koh (Barack Obama) and Jennifer Sung (Joe Biden) confirmed that the hunt was legal.
With Bea writing a statement on the ruling for all three judges, they said that the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act permits access to subsistence resources on federal land, not just access to the land where those resources may be found.
Bea cited Section 811 of ANILCA, in which Congress directed the Secretary of the Interior to ensure 'reasonable access to subsistence resources on the public lands.'
'Congress intended that the Secretary ensure that rural residents of Alaska have the reasonable opportunity to reach and use subsistence resources that can be found on federal land in Alaska,' Bea wrote.
The decision implies that the board has the authority to create hunts, not just end them, as the state had argued.
The judges also overruled part of a U.S. District Court decision that was partially in favor of the state, saying Gleason improperly handled prior instructions by the 9th Circuit.
'We hold that under Title VIII of (ANILCA), the Board has the power to authorize an emergency subsistence hunt on federal public lands for rural residents of the state of Alaska,' Bea wrote on behalf of the board.
Court of Appeals decisions are considered final, unless appealed to a higher court, such as the U.S. Supreme Court. The decision by the three judges could also be appealed to the entire 9th Circuit.
Doug Vincent-Lang, commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, said in an emailed statement that the department doesn't agree with the decision.
'We are disappointed and disagree with this decision. It is both bewildering and perplexing that the court could rule against the plain language of the Alaska National Interest Claims Act, especially in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on Chevron deference. This ruling fundamentally alters the carefully crafted agreement that Congress made in adopting their language,' he said. 'We are currently reviewing our next steps.'
Attorneys representing Kake said by email that the tribe is pleased with the result.
'Today's decision from the 9th Circuit is a significant victory for the Organized Village of Kake and Alaska Native subsistence rights,' they said. 'The 9th Circuit rejected the State of Alaska's shameful, politically-motivated attempt to gut ANILCA's subsistence provisions, and confirmed the Federal Subsistence Board's authority to open a small hunt to provide desperately needed access to healthy and traditional food to a remote Alaska community at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Today's victory is an affirmation of the promises that Congress made to protect subsistence rights, and comes at a time when the State is still seeking to erode those rights in other litigation and actions. The Tribe is very pleased with the result.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
41 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Asking Eric: We are done playing host
Dear Eric: I've been married to a great guy for the better part of 30 years. We are empty nesters, and during Covid-19, I agreed to help my male cousin who became homeless. I knew my husband wasn't wild about the idea, but he didn't fuss about it, so we let him move in. Fast-forward five years: he's living with us. I figured I could use the money, so I made him pay rent. A few days ago, I got home before my husband and decided to wait for him to get home in bed undressed. That's something we do often. To my surprise, he was mad at me and accused me of sleeping with my cousin. I was so crushed. I couldn't believe it. I can't stop crying. I can't believe he thought so little of me. I feel like my relationship is shipwrecked. Of course, I asked my cousin to leave immediately but I can't bring myself to hold my husband close to me anymore. Why can't he understand why I'm so hurt? – Wrongly Accused Dear Accused: This idea, incorrect as it is, likely took root in your husband's mind long before the blowup. And since he didn't talk about it with you, it had plenty of time to fester and flourish until it was overwhelming. I can't say why he would believe this in the first place or why he wouldn't bring it up earlier in an attempt to clear the air. I'm sorry that you and your cousin had to suffer for it. What you and your husband need right now is a clear, calm conversation that can help to chip away at the story he's created in his mind and lead you both to the root of the issue. That's going to be very hard to do without a third party guiding you, listening to you and helping you listen to each other. That third party might be a therapist, a religious leader or a friend who is skilled at remaining neutral and asking questions. Lay out the basic truth: you're hurt, and he's upset and neither of you wants to feel this way. You may want to reinforce that you're not trying to set him up or convince him. You're trying to create a space that's safe enough for both of you to hear each other and move forward. Dear Eric: For more than 30 years my husband and I hosted extended family, friends and neighbors for multiple occasions every year, including Christmas Day with gifts, kid's birthdays, bridal and baby showers and our daughters' milestones. Also, every year we threw a big Fourth of July party and included our neighbors with swimming, barbecue and tickets to our town's fireworks event where I brought desserts and coffee, etc. These occasions were wonderful, and everyone always seemed to have a great time, however, planning, preparing and hosting all of these events with both of us working full time was extremely stressful and costly. After 30 years, we decided that we were done playing host, with the exception of our daughters' families. Now we hardly ever see these former guests and when we do the typical comment is 'Where have you been hiding?' or 'Is everything OK – we have not heard from you?' as if something is wrong with us. We are stymied as to how to respond in a manner that lets people know we have been fine but decided it was time for someone else to host the get-togethers. I would love your advice. – Hosting No More Dear Hosting: Agh, the curse of the good host. You're so diligent about throwing parties, that others around you come to expect it. And when you don't do it, no one else steps up because, well, they were having too much fun eating your food and celebrating your milestones. Social gatherings really thrive on good communication and clear direction. Think of how name tags can facilitate easy conversation at a mixer or clear signage can help everyone end up in the right place at the right time for a surprise party. When people ask where you've been, it'll be helpful for you to tell them you've retired from the party business and encourage them to invite you to their gatherings. 'We miss seeing you. Maybe you can host us sometime.' This might feel forward, but people often need a little push or a little permission. And this isn't you inviting yourselves over. The others can always say no. I would even go a step further and send out a little card – maybe at a holiday, maybe whenever it comes to mind. Think of it as a reverse invitation that says, 'We've stepped back from hosting, but we still want to see you. We invite you to invite us; we'll bring dessert.'
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
LaMalfa: ‘Texas shouldn't be doing that
First District Congressman Doug LaMalfa this morning said he is opposed to an attempt in Texas to reshape congressional districts to give the Republican Party an advantage in the 2026 election. At the end of a raucous 90 minute town hall meeting at the Chico Elks Lodge Monday morning, LaMalfa responded to a direct question about his opinion on the Texas redistricting plan. 'Texas shouldn't be doing that,' LaMalfa said. 'California shouldn't be doing this. This is going to start a grass fire all across the country, every single state will try to change it based on a political outcome." LaMalfa's district is one of five identified for a potential redistricting by vote in a special California election that would occur if Texas proceeds with its plans to redistrict. LaMalfa said he supports the decision of the California voters to place redistricting in the hands of a non-partisan commission and warned that an attempt to redraw California's boundaries mid-decade would be "trampling the people's voice on this. "Texas shouldn't be doing it, either," LaMalfa said. LaMalfa heard comments and took questions from a decidedly anti-president crowd of more than 1,000. The session began with a loud boo for an opening prayer, impatience for the presentation of the American flag by Chico veterans of Foreign Wars Post 1555, and a yell to "Let's Go." "Good morning, everybody," the Congressman said to a smattering of applause and boos. "It might be the only applause of the day," he joked. After brief remarks, LaMalfa turned the meeting over to comments and questions, which lasted about 85 minutes. Those attending the event were provided red and green cards to hold in the air to signify whether they (green) agreed with what was being said at the time or (red) disagreed. If the cards were intended to keep the audience from getting loud, it didn't work. "You're not here to talk about the weather," one attendee shouted when LaMalfa opened with a mention of the forecast for a 103 degree day. "If we want to have a productive discussion it needs to be civil right," the congressman said. "So whoever has the microphone whether it is me or someone making the comments or making the questions why don't we conduct ourselves where one person at a time gets to speak and that will work a heck of a lot better. Repeatedly interrupted with shouts of "liar," LaMalfa said, "Ninety minutes is all we get so if you want to waste it go ahead. If you cant contain yourself, I don't know man." The biggest boos were reserved for discussions around Medicaid and the "Big Beautiful Bill." Most of the comments criticized the congress member for supporting the agenda of the current president. Anytime the congressman spoke, he was met with jeers. Chuck Reynolds, who described himself as a member of the Oroville City Council, however, felt compelled to apologize to the congressman for the opinions and behavior of the audience members."We actually really appreciate you congressman and having experienced serving in office I tell you this is the typical crowd basing 90 percent of its opinion one the one percent of the information. Reynolds called the crowd out for its "rude behavior, and I apologize on behalf of Butte County." Reynolds called the crowd out for its 'rude behavior, and I apologize on behalf of Butte County.' 'If you met with us more often, we might not have to yell out our disgruntlement,' responded the next person to comment. LaMalfa, a Republican from Richvale in Butte County, represents all of Sutter and Colusa counties and a large portion of Yuba County. The First District is a reliable safe Republican district after the redistricting which occurred following the 2020 census. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is calling for a special election in November 2025 asking California voters to approve a redistricting plan to offset attempts by Texas to redraw districts to add five Republican friendly districts to aid GOP chances in the 2026 election. The governor said the California redistricting, if approved by voters, would only go into effect if Texas proceeds with its plans. Solve the daily Crossword
Axios
6 hours ago
- Axios
Scoop: Beshear wows Democrats at Jeffries' big donor fundraiser
Many Democrats left House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries' annual California fundraising event last week convinced Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear is running for president, according to four attendees. Why it matters: Democrats lapped up the message from the two-term governor, who told big dollar donors and vulnerable House Democrats that the key to winning over Trump voters is staying true to your values. Jeffries' event at the luxury Lodge at Torrey Pines is the successor to Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi's wine-soaked summer donor party in Napa, California. Zoom in: Beshear's biggest applause line came when he explained why he vetoed a bill in 2023, when he was up for reelection, that restricted some medical care and bathroom use for transgender people. Beshear called it "the nastiest anti-trans bills in the nation — and I vetoed it," according to attendees. "There are some things worth losing over," Beshear said. Beshear went on to win by five percentage points in a deeply red state. Zoom out: Democrats are eager to find candidates – and messages – that they think will appeal to voters in red and blue states. Both Beshear and Jeffries spoke of the importance of authenticity and using words that voters actually use. Don't be afraid to say "addiction," Beshear said, when discussing the opioid crisis. Try to avoid using overly sanitized phrases like "substance abuse disorder," he counseled. Zoom in: In both public and private conversations, the looming mid-cycle redistricting battle was frequently discussed. Democrats promised their donors that they would respond to GOP gerrymander efforts. "We are working on an aggressive plan to make sure we fight fire with fire on redistricting," according to a member of Congress in attendance. Between the lines: Beshear adviser Eric Hyers told Axios: " Andy knows how critical it is that Democrats take back the House next year and was happy to join Leader Jeffries for a conversation about how Democrats can win tough elections." Go deeper: In addition to Jeffries, House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) attended, along with roughly a dozen "Frontline" lawmakers and some California members. After Beshear's Friday night fireside chat with Jeffries, donors got a political update from DCCC chair Suzan DelBene and Mike Smith, the president of the House Majority PAC, which can accept unlimited donations. Jared Bernstein, former President Biden's former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers and Wally Adeyemo, Biden's deputy treasury secretary, provided an economic overview. Jake Sullivan, Biden's national security adviser, and Susan Rice, one of his domestic policy advisers, discussed foreign affairs and immigration. David Shor, a Democratic pollster, who spoke at a Senate Democratic retreat earlier this year, explained to the donors that many of their top priorities don't always line up with voter's concerns.
