Alaska's subsistence management regimes

Abstract

Abstract Alaskans disagree sharply over the issue of a subsistence priority for hunting and fishing by rural residents, including most Alaskan Eskimos, Aleuts, and Indians. The issue highlights competing visions of Alaska's future; one based upon Euroamerican values and the other on indigenous rights and customary law. Recent political and legal developments, particularly the Alaska Supreme Court's 1989 McDowell decision invalidating the state of Alaska's rural priority, have undermined significantly subsistence protections. Failure of the state to restore this priority led the US federal government to take over subsistence management under provisions of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (PL 96–487). For Alaska's indigenous peoples, these events make clear the limitations of relying solely on state and federal governments for protecting subsistence. Efforts are underway to strengthen tribal governments and assert limited jurisdiction over hunting and fishing. A major goal is to achieve standing for negotiations with state and federal authorities over future co-management of subsistence resources.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.