After losing its case before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the state of Alaska is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on its subsistence fishing system, which gives preferential treatment to rural Alaskans.
“Alaska’s fisheries are among the most bountiful in the world, sustaining tens of thousands of livelihoods through commercial, sport, and subsistence fishing. Yet, the Ninth Circuit’s decision deepens a fractured system that undermines conservation, creates confusion, and threatens equitable access for all Alaskans. Salmon don’t recognize federal and state boundaries; our management shouldn’t either. We remain committed to sustainable management and will continue fighting for a system that works for every Alaskan. The Court should decide this case and reverse the Ninth Circuit,” Alaska Fish and Game Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang said in a release.
The federal and state governments have been battling over which body has ultimate authority over regulating fishing on federal lands and waters in Alaska for years.
At the heart of the conflict is a federal law, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), which gives rural Alaskans preferential treatment in fishing regulations. However, that preference is illegal under state law. The conflicting state and federal rules have led to a two-tier subsistence fishing system, where rural Alaskans are granted preferential treatment when fishing on federal lands and waters but not when fishing on state lands and waters.
The conflict came to a head in 2021, when the Federal Subsistence Board (FSB) and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game issued conflicting emergency orders over fishing along the Kuskokwim River. The state government wanted to open up fishing to all eligible residents; the federal government decided to limit subsistence fishing only to rural residents.
The difference quickly leaked into the court system, with the administration of then-U.S. President Joe Biden filing an injunction in 2022 to stop the state from allowing residents to partake in fishing along the river. In 2023, Alaska sued, claiming that the federal government was wrongly asserting its authority. Tribal groups – including the Alaska Federation of Natives and the Association of Village Council Presidents – sided with the federal government.
Courts have ruled in favor of the federal government to date, with the district court ruling against the state in 2024 and an appeals court upholding that ruling in August.
“Our Fish Commission is very pleased to see this court ruling in favor of the people of the Kuskokwim River. Not only does this uphold rural subsistence rights in Alaska, but this upholds the participation of local people, elected by the Tribes, in the co-management of Kuskokwim salmon. We are encouraged that this court recognizes our Tribes’ role in the sustainable stewardship of Kuskokwim salmon, which have provided for our families’ food security, culture, and well-being for tens of thousands of years and will continue to do so in the future,” Kuskokwim River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission Chair Martin Andrew said following the appeals court decision.
Now, the state government is asking the Supreme Court to take up its case. Alaska claims that the term “public lands” in the ANILCA does not apply to the state’s navigable waters, meaning that the federal government does not have authority to overrule state fishing regulations along the Kuskokwim River.
“ANILCA says what it says. Congress used the term ‘public lands’ more than 200 times, and it gave that term a single, clear meaning. Courts don’t get to rewrite statutes by giving words different meanings in different sections. Alaska is asking the Supreme Court to hold fast to the text because fidelity to the law as written is the foundation of the rule of law,” Alaska Attorney General Stephen Cox said in a release.
The state petition specifically asks the court to rule on “whether the United States can regulate fishing on Alaska’s navigable waters under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.”
“When Congress enacted ANILCA, it preserved State control over navigable waterways. That promise wasn’t symbolic; it was foundational as it protected not only the State’s ability to manage how people travel over the water but also the resources within the water that sustain our communities, our culture, and our future. It’s time the Courts honored Congress’s commitment,” Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy said.
