Abstract
In Sturgeon v. Frost, the Supreme Court addressed the status of navigable waters in Alaska’s conservation system units. In holding that these waters are not “public lands” for the purposes of ANILCA, the Court limited the ability of the federal government to regulate them. In a footnote, Sturgeon preserved the longstanding Katie John trilogy of Ninth Circuit precedent regarding subsistence rights. This new jurisdictional framework has the potential to cause problems for subsistence management in Alaska. This Note addresses these potential consequences and proposes possible steps to create a more harmonized subsistence management system through greater cooperation between the federal government, the State, and subsistence users.
Citation
Craig Jones,
The Impact of Sturgeon II on Alaska Subsistence Management: A Chance for Peace in the Jurisdiction Wars,
36 Alaska Law Review
221-249
(2019)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/alr/vol36/iss2/6